liiiiiiiil 


f 


^0^m^ 


BX  4917  .S32  1915 

Schaff,  David  Schley,  1852 

John  Huss 


JOHN  HUSS 


JOHN  HUSS 

—HIS  LIFE,  TEACHINGS  AND  DEATH— 

AFTER  FIVE  HUNDRED  YEARS 


-^        BY 

DAVID  S.'SCHAFF,  D.D. 

PROFESSOR    OF   CHtfeCH   HISTORY,   THE   WESTERN   THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY 


l^on  debemiis  consuehidinem  sequi  sed  Chrisli 
exemplum  et  veritatcm 

Not  usage  are  we  to  follow  but  the  example 
of  Christ  and  the  truth 

— Huss's  letter,  written  from  prison, 
Constance,  June  21,  1415 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS 

191S 


Copyright,  igis,  by 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


Published  May,  1915 


PREFACE 

John  Huss  belongs  not  to  Bohemia  alone.  He  has  a 
place  in  the  reUgious  history  of  Europe  and  the  West.  For 
the  three  communions  of  Christendom  his  career  has  an  in- 
terest. As  for  the  Greek  church,  some  of  its  historians  find 
in  his  preaching,  and  the  preaching  of  his  predecessors  a 
reminiscence  of  the  original  type  of  Christianity  prevalent  in 
Bohemia  which,  they  hold,  was  of  Oriental  origin.  The  Roman 
Catholic  communion  cannot  forget  that  his  personality  and 
teachings  occupied  the  attention  of  the  famous  council  of 
Constance  and  was  the  concern  of  the  great  theologians  and 
churchmen  of  his  age,  and  that  his  sentence  to  death  as  a 
heretic  threatened  the  permanent  alienation  of  Bohemia 
from  the  apostoHc  see  and  also  involved  that  country  in 
some  of  the  most  lamentable  reUgious  wars  Europe  has  seen. 
Individual  Catholics  may  follow  Bishop  Hefele  and  admire 
Huss's  moral  heroism  in  the  face  of  death,  but  no  official 
proposition  has  been  made  to  remove  the  opprobrium  which 
was  cast  upon  his  name  by  the  council  of  Constance  as  the 
church  has  done  in  the  case  of  Joan  of  Arc,  from  whom  it 
has  not  only  removed  the  condemnatory  sentence  of  a  con- 
temporary ecclesiastical  court  but  whom  it  has  even  beatified. 

To  Protestants  Huss  appears  as  a  forerunner  of  the 
Reformation  by  his  assertion  of  the  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  his  definition  of  the  church.  Moreover,  to  all 
who  follow  with  interest  the  progress  of  toleration  in  mat- 
ters of  religious  opinion  and  general  thought,  he  occupies  the 
place  of  a  martyr  to  the  sacred  rights  of  conscience.  A 
modern  circle,  whose  bounds  cannot  be  well  defined,  may 
find  in  him  an  advocate  of  the  principle  that  in  the  religious 


vi  PREFACE 

domain,  so  far  as  human  judgment  goes,  the  criterion  of  a 
Christian  profession  is  daily  conduct — a  criterion  expressed 
in  the  maxim,  often  quoted  by  Huss:  "By  their  fruits  ye  shall 
know  them." 

Some  will  be  attracted  to  Huss  chiefly  by  the  fidehty  to 
conviction  which  he  maintained  even  in  the  presence  of  a 
horrible  death;  others  by  those  principles  which  he  defined 
with  more  or  less  clearness  and  which  were  opposed  to  the 
system  built  up  during  the  Middle  Ages  and  abhorred  by 
the  churchmen  and  theologians  of  Huss's  own  age. 

From  whatever  standpoint  he  may  be  regarded,  as  a 
heretic  or  as  an  advocate  of  forgotten  Scriptural  truth,  as  a 
contumacious  rebel  against  constituted  church  authority  or 
as  an  advocate  of  the  just  rights  of  conscience,  the  five-hun- 
dredth anniversary  of  his  death  at  Constance,  July  6,  191 5,  -y 
will  again  call  attention  to  his  personality  and  his  teachings 
and,  as  is  hoped,  promote  the  study  of  the  foundations  of 
church  authority  in  such  an  irenic  spirit  that  the  cause  of 
the  mutual  recognition  of  Christians,  one  of  the  other,  may 
be  advanced.  Is  it  too  much  to  hope  that  the  solemn  study 
of  this  man's  Christian  aims  and  death  may  promote  the  dis- 
position to  regard  with  tolerance  doctrinal  errors  when  the 
persons  who  hold  them  are  moved  with  devotion  to  the  per- 
son of  Christ  and  the  promotion  of  good- will  among  men  ? 

This  biography  is  intended  not  only  to  set  forth  the  teach- 
ings and  activity  of  John  Huss  and  the  circumstances  of  his 
death  but  also  to  show  the  perpetuation  of  his  influence  upon 
the  centuries  that  have  elapsed  since  he  suffered  at  the  stake. 
"He  being  dead  yet  speaketh." 

In  departing  from  Huss's  own  spelling  of  his  name — Hus 
— which  is  the  usage  in  Bohemia,  I  am  influenced  by  the  fact 
that  the  form  Huss  is  more  familiar  to  our  eyes  and  agree- 
able to  our  general  usage  in  spelling.  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
Loserth,  the  author  of  the  volume,  WicliJ  and  Hus,  has 
adopted  the  form  Huss  in  his  article  in  the  Herzog  Encyclo- 


PREFACE  vii 

pedia,  and  Karl  Miiller  also  in  his  Church  History.  As  for 
the  spelling  of  Bohemian  names  written  with  an  accent,  as 
Palec,  they  are  given  in  this  volume  as  Palecz — this  spelling 
representing  the  pronunciation  in  the  Czech  tongue.  The 
name  of  the  king  contemporary  with  Huss  is  given  as  Wenzel 
rather  than  Wenceslaus,  the  Latin  form,  or  Vaklav,  the 
Bohemian  form,  although  there  is  an  inconsistency  when  the 
saint  is  called  St.  Wenceslaus. 

The  author  is  not  acquainted  with  Bohemian.  Such  a 
knowledge,  so  far  as  he  is  able  to  make  out,  is  not  necessary 
to  a  just  and  full  study  of  Huss.  His  Bohemian  writings, 
which  are  not  translated,  are  of  a  homiletic  and  devotional 
character  and  add  nothing  to  our  knowledge  of  his  teachings 
and  only  a  few  facts  in  his  career.  His  chief  works  are  all 
in  Latin,  into  which  his  letters,  so  far  as  they  were  written 
in  Czech,  have  been  translated.  Moreover,  most  of  the  works 
of  Bohemian  authors  on  the  subject  of  Huss  are  found  in 
German,  as  by  Palacky,  or  in  English,  as  the  two  recent  works 
by  Liitzow.  All  the  Latin  writings  have  been  consulted. 
Moreover,  I  have  used  the  chief  Life  of  Huss  written  in  Bo- 
hemian, that  of  Doctor  Flajshans,  in  a  translation  made  for  my  / 
private  use  by  one  of  the  Bohemian  students  of  the  Western 
Theological  Seminary,  Mr.  Alois  Husak. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  original  authorities  upon  which 
the  life  of  Huss  must  be  based  and  also  a  list  of  most  of  the 
secondary  works  bearing  on  the  subject.  All  have  been  used 
in  the  preparation  of  this  volume  except  the  Czech  works 
of  Huss  which  have  not  been  translated  into  Latin,  and  the 
writings  of  Tomek. 

HUSS'S  LATIN  WRITINGS 

Historia  et  Monumenta  J .  Hus  atque  Hieronymi  Pragefisis  Confessortnn 
Christi.  Nurnb.,  1558.  2  vols.  Reprinted  Frankf.,  171 5.  2  vols.,  pp. 
627,  542 — containing  the  bulk  of  Huss's  treatises  and  letters,  and 
also  sermons,  with  Luther's  prefaces  of  the  three  editions  of  cer- 
tain of  Huss's  writings,  Wittenberg,  1536,  1537,  acts   and   docu- 


viii  PREFACE 

ments  of  the  council  of  Constance,  the  shorter  account  of  Huss's 
life  by  Mladenowicz,  a  life  of  Jerome  of  Prague,  etc.  I  have  cited 
the  Frankfurt  edition,  although  both  editions  have  been  on  my 
table  and  used. 

Documenta  Mag.  J.  Ems.  140J-1418.  Ed.  Francis  Palacky.  Prague, 
1869,  pp.  755.  Contains  Huss's  letters,  Mladenowicz's  full  account 
of  Huss  from  his  journey  to  Constance  to  his  death,  the  different 
lists  of  charges  made  against  Huss  and  one  hundred  and  twenty 
other  official  documents,  with  some  added  matter  translated  from 
the  Bohemian,  Huss's  alleged  catechism,  etc.  It  would  be  difficult 
to  find  such  a  full  and  well-organized  collection  of  materials  bearing 
on  the  life  of  any  other  historic  character. 

The  editions  edited  by  Wenzel  Flajshans — Expositio  Decalogi, 
Prague,  1903,  pp.  51;  de  Corpore  Christi,  Prague,  1904,  pp.  35; 
de  Sanguine  Christi,  Prague,  1904,  pp.  42;  super  IV.  Sententiarum 
Petri  Lombardi,  in  connection  with  Doctor  M.  Kominkova,  Prague, 
1905,  pp.  772.  Sermones  de  Sanctis,  Prague,  1907,  pp.  405.  All 
prefaced  with  elaborate  introductions  in  German. 

HUSS'S   CZECH  WRITINGS 

K.  J.  Erben:  3  vols.,  1865-1868.  Vol.  I  contains  Expositions  of 
the  Decalogue,  App.  Creed,  etc.  Vol.  II,  the  Postilla  Huss  Boh. 
sermons.     Vol.  Ill,  a  Com.  on  the  Song  of  Solomon  and  letters. 

F.  Zilka:    under  the  title  The  Spirit  of  Utiss'  Works,  3  vols.,  1901. 

Mares:   Letters  of  Hus,  Prague,  1891.  2d  ed.,  1901. 

TRANSLATIONS 

Letters  of  John  Hus,  trsl.  with  introductions  by  H.  B.  Workman  and 

R.  Martin  Pope,  London,  1904,  pp.  286. 
Huss:  Treatise  on  the  Church,  de  Ecclesia,  trsl,  with  notes,  David  S. 

ScHAFF,  New  York,  191 5. 
German  trsl.   of  Sermons  by  W.  von  Langsdorff,  Leipzig,  1894, 

pp.  150. 
C.  von  Kugelgen:  Die  Gefangenschaftshriefe  des  J.  Hiis,  a  reprint 

of  the  Wittenberg  ed.    1536,  Leipz.,  1902,  pp.  30. 

OTHER  AUTHORITIES 

Van  der  Hardt:  Magnum  Constantiense  Concilium,  6  vols.,  Frkf. 
and  Leipz.,  1700.  An  invaluable  collection  of  documents  gathered 
with  vast  industry  but  thrown  together  without  regard  for  chrono- 
logical or  logical  order,  bearing  upon  Huss  and  the  council,  Jerome 
of  Prague,  etc.  Contains  also  works  of  Gerson,  Clemangis,  Nie- 
heim,  and  Lives  of  Gerson,  d'Ailly,  etc.     Illustrated  with  many 


PREFACE 


IX 


portraits  of  distinguished  personages,  twenty-four  pages  giving  the 

coats  of  arms  of  princes,   cardinals,   bishops,   abbots,   and  other 

dignitaries. 
Mansi:   Concilia,  vols.  XXVII,  XXVIII. 
Ulrich  von  Richental:  Chronik  des  Constanzer  Concils,  1414-1418. 

Ed.  Buck,  Tubingen,  1882. 
Finke:  Acta  Concilii  Constanciensis,  1410-1414,  Miinster,  1896. 
Mirbt:   Quellen  zur  Gesch.  des  Papsltums.    3d  ed.,  191 1. 
iENEAS  Sylvius:   de  Bohemorum  origine  ac  gestis  historia.     Cologne, 

1523- 
J.  CocHLiEUS  (Dobneck):  Histories  Hussitarum,  Mainz,  1549. 

MODERN  WORKS 

F.  Palacky  (d.  1876),  a  descendant  of  the  Bohemian  Brethren  and 
royal  historiographer  of  Bohemia:  Geschichte  von  Bohmen,  Prag, 
1836,  sqq.  3d  ed.,  1864,  sqq.,  5  vols.,  to  1526.  Put  upon  the  Index, 
trsl.  into  German  1846  by  J.  P.  Jordan — Die  Vorlaufer  des  Husi- 
tenthums  in  Bohmen,  new  ed.,  Prag,  1869 — Urkundliche  Beitrage 
zur  Gesch.  des  Husitenkriegs,  1873,  2  vols.  Best  authority  on 
Bohemian  history. 

Hefele:  Conciliengeschichte,  vol.  VII,  1874. 

J.  A.  Helfert:  Hus  und  Hierojiymus,  Prag,  1853,  pp.  332. 

J.  B.  Schwab:  J.  Gerson,  Wurzburg,  1858. 

C.  A.  Hofler:  Mag.  J.  Hus  und  der  Abzug  der  deutsch.  Studenten  und 
Professoren  aus  Prag,  i4og,  1864,  pp.  325. 

W.  Berger:  /.  Hus  und  Kdnig  Sigmund,  Augsbg.,  1871.     A  careful 

study. 
P.  Tschackert:   Peter  von  Ailli,  Gotha,  1877. 

F.  VON  Bezold:  Kdnig  Sigismund  und  die  Reichskriege  gegen  die 
Husiten,  3  vols.,  Munich,  1872-1875. 

E.  H.  Gillett:  The  Life  and  Times  of  John  Buss,  or  the  Bohemian 
Reformation  of  the  Fifteenth  Century,  Boston,  1864.  2  vols.,  3d  ed. 
1871.     Based  on  the  sources. 

G.  V.  Lechler:  /.  Wyclif  and  His  English  Precursors,  Lond.,  1884. 
A.  H.  Wratislaw:  John  Hus,  Lond.,  1882.     Also  Natl.  Lit.  of  Bo- 
hemia in  the  Fourteenth  Century,  Lond.,  1878. 

J.  LosERTH,  Prof,  at  Graz :  Wiclif  and  Hus,  trsl.  from  the  German, 
Lond.,  1884,  pp.  366.     Also  Huss,  Art.  in  Herzog,  8  :  472-489. 

Vaclav  Flajshans:  Mislr  Jan  Receny  Hus  z  Husince  (Master  John, 
called  Hus  of  Husinecz),  pp.  486,  Prag,  1904.  The  most  elaborate 
biography  in  Czech,  by  a  liberal  Catholic. 


X  PREFACE 

Count  Lutzow:  Life  and  Times  of  Master  J.  Bus,  Lond.,  1909,  pp. 

398 — also  Hussite  Wars,  Lond.,  1914. 
Oscar  Kuhns:  John  Huss,  the  Witttess,  N.  Y,,  Cinti.,  no  date. 
Otto  von  Schaching:  Jan  Hus  und  seine  Zeit,  Regensb.,  1914,  pp. 

272.     Follows   Helfert,    though   lacking   Helfert's   ability,   in   pro- 
nouncing Huss  the  first  of  modern  revolutionists. 
N.  Hauri:  J.  Hus,  ein  Wahrheitszeuge,  Constance,  191 5,  pp.  63. 
Also   J.  Foxe:    Actes   and  Monuments,    3  :  405-579.     Substantially 

accurate. 
Art.  Huss,  in  Schaf-Herzog  and  the  Cath.  Encyclopedia. 
H.  Radshall:  The  Universities  of  Europe,  Oxford,  1895,  vol.  II. 
M.  Creighton:  Last  Popes  of  the  M.  A.     Vol.  I. 
J.  H.  Wylie:  The  Council  of  Constance  to  the  Death  of  J.  Hus,  Lend., 

1900. 
Lea:   History  of  the  Inquisition,  2  :  462  sqq. 
Workman,  Age  of  Hus,  Lond.,  1902. 
Schaff:  Church  History,  vol.  V^,  pt.  2. 
The  Works  of  Wyclif,  1885  sqq.,  especially  the  de  Ecclesia,  with  introd. 

by  Loserth  and  the  de  Dominio  divino  and  de  civili  Dominio,  with 

introductions  by  Poole. 
W.  W.  Tomek:  The  writings  of  this  Czech  author  on  the  university 

of  Prague,  1849,  and  the  city  of  Prague,  1855, 1  know  only  through 

quotations. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PRAGUE 
TO  JOHN  HUSS 

May  23,  1416,  Monumenta,  i:  103 

O  virum  inefabilem,  venerandcs  prafiilgentem  specula  sanctitatis.  O 
virum  humllem  tnagnce  pietatis  radio  coruscantem,  qui  contemptor 
divitiaruni  usque  ad  excussum  sinum  pauperibus  ministrabat ;  qui 
genua  pr onus  fleeter e  ad  egenorum  lectos  non  recusabat ;  qui  lachrymis 
duros  ad  posnitentiam  provocabat,  animosque  feroces  ineffabili  dul- 
cedine  mulcendo  mitigabat ;  qui  vitia  generaliter  cunctorum,  prcesertim, 
superbi  cupidi  et  opulentis  Cleri,  antiquis  et  oblitis  scripturarum 
remediis  quasi  novo  quodam  et  inaudito  incentivo  ex  magna  charitate 
funditus  exurebat,  apostolicisque  innixus  vestigiis  tota  sua  cura 
primcBvcB  Ecclesice  mores  in  Clero  restaurabat  et  populo ;  qui  etiam  in 
verbi  Jortitudine  et  sapientia  cceteros  superabat,  in  omnibus  omnia 
exercens  opera  charitatis,  puree  fidei  et  inviolabilis  vcritatis  .  .  .  ut 
in  omnibus  fieret  Magister  vita;  sine  pari. 

O  matchless  man  shining  above  all  by  the  example  of  splendid  sanc- 
tity. O  humble  man  flashing  with  the  ray  of  great  piety,  who 
contemned  riches  and  ministered  to  the  poor  even  to  the  opening 
out  of  his  bosom, — who  did  not  refuse  to  bend  his  knee  at  the  beds 
of  the  sick, — who  brought  with  tears  the  hardened  to  repentance, 
and  composed  and  softened  untamed  minds  by  his  unspeakable 
sweetness, — who  burned  against  the  vices  of  all  men  and  especially 
the  rich  and  proud  clergy,  basing  his  appeals  upon  the  old  and  for- 
gotten remedies  of  the  Scriptures  as  by  a  new  and  unheard  of 
motive,  conceived  in  great  love,  and  who  following  in  the  steps  of 
the  Apostles  by  his  pastoral  care  revived  in  clergy  and  people  the 
righteous  living  of  the  early  church, — who  by  braveness  and  wisdom 
in  utterance  excelled  the  rest,  showing  in  all  things  the  works  of 
love,  pure  faith,  and  undeviating  truth  .  .  .  that  in  all  things  he 
might  be  a  Master  of  life  without  compare. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.    The  Age  in  Which  Huss  Lived i 

General  estimate  of  Huss — The  period,  1300-1500 — Boniface 
VIII — The  Unam  sanctam — The  mediasval  papacy — Thomas 
Aquinas  and  the  papacy — Treatment  of  heresy — Attacks 
against  the  papacy — Dante,  Marsiglius  of  Padua — The 
German  mystics — The  Humanists — Disciplinary  reformers — 
Reformers  before  the  Reformation — The  Avignon  exile  and 
papal  schism — Huss  in  the  midst  of  these  movements. 

II.      Huss   AND   THE   BeTHLEHEM   ChAPEL ig 

Huss's  birth  and  school  life — At  the  university — Rector — Or- 
dained priest — Preacher  at  Bethlehem — Prague  as  an  intel- 
lectual and  religious  centre — Charles  IV,  Petrarch,  ^neas 
Sylvius — The  Bethlehem  chapel — Bohemian  preachers — 
Konrad  of  Waldhausen — Milicz  of  Kremsier — Matthias  of 
Janow — Huss's  sermons — Preaching  before  the  synod — The 
Bethlehem  chapel  pulpit — Huss's  Christmas  meditation — 
Palacky  on  Huss  as  a  preacher. 

III.  Huss's  Debt  to  Wyclif 43  "^ 

The  university  of  Prague — Wyclif's  writings  carried  to  Bohemia 
— Wyclif's  teachings — His  treatment  in  England — His  defini- 
tion of  the  church — His  influence  at  the  university  of  Prague 
— Its  decision  on  the  Wyclifite  Articles — Waldenses. 

IV.  Huss  AS  A  National  Leader 58 

Three  currents  in  Prague — Archbishop  Zbynek — Huss  as 
synodal  preacher — Attacks  clerical  vice — The  blood  of 
Wylsnack — The  parts  of  Christ's  body — Relics — Document 
from  Oxford  about  Wyclif — Palecz  and  Stanislaus  of  Znaim 
— Zbynek  summoned  by  the  pope  to  search  for  Wyclifite 
heresy — Indictment  against  Huss — The  doctrine  of  rema- 
nence — Zbynek's  reply — "No  heresy  in  Bohemia" — Call  of 
the  council  of  Pisa — Breach  between  Wenzel  and  Zbynek — 
Wenzel's  withdrawal  from  the  Roman  obedience — Sigismund 
— Wenzel's  sympathies  for  Huss — Germans  and  Czechs  at  the 
university — Wenzel  changes  the  charter — Secession  of  the 
Germans — Huss's  responsibility.  w 

V.    In  Open  Revolt  Against  the  Archbishop      .     .      85 

Council  of  Pisa — Huss  supports  Alexander  V — Huss  indicted 
at  Rome — Alexander  orders  chapels  for  preaching  closed  and 
Wyclifism  punished — Zbynek  decrees  the  burning  of  Wye- 


xiv  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

lif's  writings — Huss's  appeal — Sermon  of  defiance — The 
writings  burned — Huss  excommunicated — Wyclif  defended  in 
public  addresses — Huss's  assertion  of  freedom  of  inquiry — 
"^■"^i  Richard  Wyche — Huss  appeals  to  John  XXIII — King  and 
queen  intercede — Huss's  procurators — Huss  cited  to  Rome — 
Refuses  to  obey — Indignities  to  Zbynek — Formal  attempt  to 
reconcile  Zbynek  and  Huss — Zbynek's  withdrawal  from 
Prague — Turns  to  Sigismund — Zbynek's  death. 

VI.    Huss  Resists  the  Pope 107    '•'^ 

Huss's  case  a  European  affair — John  Stokes's  visit  to  Prague — 
Huss's  reply  to  Stokes — The  sale  of  indulgences — Ladislaus 
— John  XXII I's  two  bulls — Huss's  resistance — Treatise 
against  indulgences — A  crusade  for  killing  Christians — 
Jerome  of  Prague — Parody  on  the  burning  of  Wyclif's  books 
— Rioters  executed — Wyclif's  XLV  Articles  stigmatized  by 
Palecz — Huss's  reply  to  the  eight  doctors — Pope  has  no 
business  with  the  material  sword. 

VII.    Withdrawal  from  Prague 133 

Huss's  aggravated  excommunication — Interdict  pronounced 
over  Prague — Huss's  appeal  to  Christ— Effect  of  the  inter- 
dict— Wenzel  calls  on  Huss  to  withdraw  from  Prague — Huss 
at  Austi — Konrad,  archbishop  of  Prague — 111  fame  of  Bo- 
hemia— Huss's  letters — His  use  of  Scripture — Wyclif's 
books  burned  at  Rome — Commission  appointed  to  settle  the 
dissension — Palecz's  protest  against  the  decision — Gerson's 
XX  charges — The  opposition  to  Huss. 

VIII.    Before  the  Council  of  Constance 161 

Purpose  of  the  council — -Sigismund  promises  the  salvus  con- 
diictus — Certificates  to  Huss's  orthodoxy — The  journey  to 
Constance — The  council — Huss's  arrest — Imprisoned  at  the 
Blackfriars — Huss's  sickness — Correspondence — The  com- 
mission of  inquisition — Sigismund's  arrival — His  attitude 
to  Huss — Jerome's  first  arrest. 

DC.    Before  the  Council  of  Constance    .    .    .^.    .     191 

John  XXIII's  flight — Panic  in  Constance — Huss  removed  to 
Gottlieben— Protests  from  Bohemian  nobles — Distribution 
of  the  cup  in  Prague — Huss's  attitude— Transferred  to  the 
Franciscan  friary — Huss's  hearings  June  5,  7,  8 — The 
formal  charges — Sigismund's  address — d'Ailly's  counsel — 
Sigismund's  last  words  to  Huss — Huss  and  conscience — Huss 
and  the  council. 

X.    Condemned  and  Burned  at  the  Stake  ....     228 

Sigismund's  confidential  address — Last  four  weeks  of  Huss's 
life — Called  upon  to  abjure— Last  meeting  with  Palecz — 
Huss  on  the  pope — The  council — Last  messages — Use  of  the 
Scriptures — Distribution    of    the    cup — Huss's    books    con- 


CONTENTS  XV 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

demned  to  the  flames — A  final  deputation  from  the  council — 
Arraigned  in  the  cathedral — Bishop  of  Lodi's  sermon — ^Sen- 
tence pronounced — Degradation  from  the  priesthood — The 
way  to  the  stake — The  last  scene. 

XI.    Huss's  Place  in  History 260  --^ 

Among  his  own  people — In  his  age — Did  Huss  know  he  was  a 
heretic  ? — Condemned  according  to  law — Huss's  four  funda- 
mental errors — Sigismund's  treatment  of  Huss — The  safe- 
conduct — Huss's  understanding  of  it — Huss  and  Luther — 
The  Hussite  hymn-book — Huss  and  liberty  of  conscience — 
Gerson's  attitude — The  Reformation. 

XII.    Huss's  Writings  and  the  Hussites 304 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  Huss,  Savonarola — Polemic  works — The 
Treatise  on  the  Church — Debt  to  Wyclif — Commentary  on 
the  Lombard's  Sentences — Hymns — The  news  of  Huss's 
death  at  Prague — Revolt  in  Bohemia — Efforts  to  appease 
Huss's  followers — Jerome  of  Prague  burned — Poggio's  letter 
— Martin  V — Calixtines  and  Taborites — The  university  on 
Huss — Crusades  against  the  Hussites — Basel  council  grants 
the  use  of  the  cup — The  downfall  of  Hussitism — The  Mo- 
ravians— Huss's  followers  in  Prague  to-day — Huss's  spirit  in 
Bohemia. 

Appendix  I.     Chronological  Table 337 

Appendix  II.     A  Spurious  Work  on  Huss   .    .    .    341 
Tndex 343 


JOHN    HUSS 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED 

Siimma  philosophia  est  Christus,  dens  nosier,  quern  sequeiido  et  dis- 
cendo  sumiis  philoso'phi. — Wyclif,  de  Ver.  Scrip.,  I  :  32. 

The  supreme  philosophy  is  Christ,  our  God,  and  in  following  him 
and  learning  from  him  we  are  philosophers. 

In  John  Huss,  Bohemia  has  made  its  one  notable  and 
permanent  contribution  to  the  progress  of  Western  culture 
and  religious  thought.  Other  names  the  general  student  as- 
sociates with  its  people  are  Jerome  of  Prague,  Charles  IV 
and  the  bhnd  King  John.  Jerome's  name  is  linked  with  the 
name  of  Huss.  Charles  IV  acted  an  important  part  in  the 
history  of  his  time  through  the  university  which  he  founded 
and  his  patronage  of  letters,  which  made  Prague  a  centre  of 
study.  The  blind  king  of  Bohemia,  John  of  Luxemburg, 
occupies  a  place  in  the  romance  of  English  history.  He  fell 
in  the  thick  of  the  fight  at  Crecy,  1346,  and  furnished  to  the 
coat  of  arms  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  the  motto,  Ich  dien,  I 
serve,  which  the  Black  Prince  appropriated. 

Strange  to  say,  the  honor  so  freely  accorded  to  Huss  in 
Protestant  circles  is  still  denied  him  by  the  vast  majority  of 
his  own  countrymen.  Not  two  per  cent  of  the  population  of 
Bohemia  is  Protestant.  Outside  of  that  small  and  respect- 
able circle  a  change  has  been  taking  place  in  the  last  few  years 
in  the  feelings  of  Bohemia  toward  its  eminent  citizen.  Once 
the  idol  of  his  people,  his  memory  was  for  centuries  obscured 
by  religious  prejudice.    Every  memorial  of  him,  where  possible, 


2  JOHN  HUSS 

was  destroyed  and  the  Bohemian  people  were  taught  to  be- 
lieve that  he,  ''whose  heart  beat  so  warmly  for  his  own 
nation  and  for  God's  law,"^  was  its  worst  enemy,  an  emissary 
of  evil,  not  of  good.  This  change  has  been  going  on  since 
1848,  when  religious  liberty  was  granted  by  the  Austrian 
government.  Huss  has  come  to  be  looked  upon  in  ever- 
widening  .circles  as  the  chief  of  Bohemian  patriots,  and  his 
patriotism  is  celebrated  with  bonfires  in  Southern  Bohemia 
yearly  on  July  6,  the  supposed  date  of  his  birth.  This  is 
in  spite  of  the  unbroken  attachment  which  prevails  in  that 
section  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  There  is  also  a  group 
of  free-thinking  persons  in  Prague,  not  closely  bound  to 
Catholic  institutions,  who  go  further  in  honoring  his  memory. 
They  have  been  foremost  in  making  preparations  to  com- 
memorate the  five-hundredth  anniversary  of  Huss's  birth  by 
the  erection  of  a  monument  on  the  public  square  of  Prague, 
with  which  Huss's  own  cause  and  the  career  of  his  followers 
are  so  closely  identified.  This  fifth  centenary,  occurring  in 
19 1 5,  will  serve  to  call  attention  afresh  to  the  debt  which  the 
religious  institutions  of  the  West  and  the  cause  of  religious 
toleration  owe  to  the  Bohemian  reformer.  It  is  doubtful,  if  we 
except  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Jesus  Christ,  whether  the 
forward  movement  of  rehgious  enlightenment  and  human  free- 
dom have  been  advanced  as  much  by  the  sufferings  and  death 
of  any  single  man  as  by  the  death  of  Huss.  Augustine,  Ber- 
nard, Luther — to  speak  only  of  religious  characters — exer- 
cised their  influence  by  their  lives  and  writings;  Huss  chiefly 
by  his  sufferings  in  prison  and  the  flames.  Paul's  death  was 
an  incident  in  his  career.  In  dying,  Huss  accomplished  more 
than  he  did  by  living. 

Huss's  career  belongs  to  a  movement  which  was  going  on 
during  the  two  centuries  separating  the  productive  period  of 

^  Flajshans,  Expositio  Decalogi,  p.  ii.  Liitzow,  Life  of  Hus,  p.  63,  says: 
"Hus  was  the  idol  of  the  Bohemian  people,  whose  greatest  representative  in 
the  world's  story  he  remains." 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  3 

the  Middle  Ages  and  the  period  of  the  Reformation.  During 
these  two  hundred  years — 1300  to  1500,  or  from  the  reign  of 
Boniface  VIII  to  Luther's  theses,  15 17 — a  forward  impulse 
of  thought  manifested  and  maintained  itself  leading  away 
from  the  compulsory  authority  of  the  church  and  the  hier- 
archy of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  pushing  toward  the  intellec- 
tual and  religious  freedom  of  modern  times.  The  mind  of 
Europe  was  striving  to  get  rid  of  the  sacramental  fetters  with 
which  it  had  become  bound  by  the  papal  decrees  and  the 
speculations  of  the  Schoolmen  and  to  find  its  way  to  the  as- 
sertion of  the  rightof  the  individual  to  immediate  communion 
with  God  and  individual  sovereignty  in  matters  of  conscience. 
The  dissatisfaction  with  the  old  mediaeval  order  found  isolated 
but  strong  expression  from  individuals  here  and  there,  and  at 
the  same  time  gleams  of  the  new  order  about  to  be  introduced 
in  the  sixteenth  century  shot  forth  suddenly  like  Northern 
Hghts,  though  they  as  suddenly  disappeared. 

By  the  year  1300  the  faculty  for  governmental  construc- 
tion and  the  theological  ingenuity  of  the  mediaeval  mind  had 
exhausted  themselves.  For  two  hundred  years  before  that 
date  the  Crusades  had  been  actively  prosecuted  from  the  con- 
quest of  Jerusalem,  1099,  to  the  abandonment  of  the  last  foot 
of  soil  possessed  by  the  Crusaders  in  the  Holy  Land,  139 1,  a 
period  which  witnessed  the  complete  development  of  the  me- 
diaeval papacy  and  church.  During  the  next  two  hundred 
years,  up  to  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  single  [^individuals 
from  Italy  to  England  protested  against  these  constructions. 
In  the  end  they  succeeded,  while  the  armies  of  the  Crusades 
failed.  The  former  two  hundred  years,  the  period  of  the  Cru- 
sades, saw  the  rise  of  the  great  Mendicant  orders,  the  full 
bloom  of  the  scholastic  theology,  the  estabhshment  of  the  papal 
inquisition,  and  the  perfection  of  the  sacramental  system 
which  was  regarded  as  being  as  essential  to  salvation  as  fire 
is  to  heat  a  cold  body  or  medicine  to  cure  sickness.  The 
latter  period  of  two  hundred  years  heard  protests  against 


4  JOHN  HUSS 

the  existing  order  which  were  based  on  Scripture,  reason  and 
history — a  new  tribunal.  These  were  stifled  one  after  the 
other  till  the  voice  was  heard  as  from  another  Nazareth,  the 
voice  from  the  North,  a  region  from  which  little  good  was 
expected  to  come.  John  Huss  was  one  of  those  who  joined 
this  protest  against  the  mediaeval  order,  who  helped  to  dis- 
credit the  infallible  authority  of  the  papal  monarchy  and  to 
advance  the  cause  of  individual  rights  in  matters  of  belief 
and  practice. 

The  three  mighty  constructions  of  mediaeval  thought,  if 
we  omit  the  universities  and  the  cathedrals,  were  the  absolute 
papacy,  the  sacramental  church  and  the  inquisition.  The 
famous  bull,  Unam  sandam,  issued  by  Boniface  VIII,  1302, 
^constitutes  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  papal  dominion  ^d 
the  coercive  jurisdiction  claimed  for  the  church.  It  gave 
final  expression  to  the  theory  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  papacy. 
Intended  to  break  down  the  opposition  of  Philip  IV  of  France, 
who  was  asserting  the  independent  rights  of  kings,  it  set  forth 
in  unambiguous  terms  the  pope's  claim  to  supreme  authority 
in  all  mundane  affairs  and  made  salvation  to  depend  upon 
personal  submission  to  him.  Boniface  was  giving  expression 
to  no  new  assumption.  In  compact  statement  he  gathered 
up  the  claims  which  his  predecessors  had  been  constantly 
making  for  more  than  two  centuries.  The  strongest  cham- 
pions of  these  claims  had  been  Gregory  VII  and  Innocent  III. 
These  pontiffs  affirmed  that  the  papal  office  founded  in  Peter 
combined  supreme  authority  in  the  church  and  also  over 
princes.  They  compared  the  ecclesiastical  and  the  civil 
powers — sacerdotium  and  imperium — to  the  sun  and  gold  on 
the  one  hand,  and  to  the  moon  and  lead  on  the  other  hand. 
Gregory,  1073-1085,  solemnly  announced  that  the  state  had 
its  origin  in  evil — greed  and  ambition,  cruelty,  plunder,  and 
murder.  The  church  is  an  institution  of  divine  appointment 
estabHshed  when  Christ  said  to  Peter:  "Thou  art  Peter  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,"  Matt.  16  :  18.    This 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  5 

masterful  ruler  found  the  pope's  right  to  set  up  and  depose 
kings  authorized  in  the  Old  Testament,  quoting  with  pecuHar 
delight  the  words  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  i  :  10:  "See,  I 
have  this  day  set  thee  over  the  nation  and  over  the  kingdom, 
to  pluck  up  and  to  break  down,  and  to  destroy  and  to  over- 
throw, to  build  and  to  plant."  In  his  conflict  with  the  em- 
peror Henry  IV,  he  not  only  deposed  that  monarch,  the  heir 
of  Charlemagne,  but  released  his  subjects  from  allegiance 
and  had  a  rival  emperor  elected  to  take  his  place.  Gregory 
died  in  exile,  not  defeated  and  not  a  victor. 

Innocent  III,  1198-1216,  who  died  in  the  full  possession 
of  his  power,  declared  that,  as  Peter  alone  went  to  Jesus  on 
the  water,  so  the  pope  has  the  unique  privilege  of  ruling  over 
the  nations  of  the  earth.  As  the  moon  gets  its  light  from  the 
superior  orb,  the  sun,  so  the  emperor  and  princes  get  their 
authority  from  Christ's  vicegerent  on  earth.  The  pope  judges 
all  and  is  judged  by  no  man.  To  the  tribunal  of  God  alone 
is  he  responsible.  Innocent's  bull,  per  Venerabilem,^  claiming 
for  the  pope  the  plenitude  of  power — plenitiido  potestatis—- 
was  quoted  in  later  times  as  the  authoritative  statement  of 
papal  rule  over  both  realms.  This  principle  was  well  ex- 
pressed by  Thomas  a  Becket  addressing  the  clergy  of  Eng- 
land: "Who  presumes  to  doubt  that  the  priests  of  God  are 
the  fathers  and  masters  of  kings,  princes,  and  all  the  faith- 
ful?" About  the  same  time  the  monk  Caesar  of  Heisterbach 
gave  voice  to  the  popular  opinion  when  he  compared  the 
church  to  the  firmament,  the  pope  to  the  sun,  the  emperor 
to  the  moon,  the  clergy  to  the  day,  bishops  and  abbots  to 
the  stars  and  the  laity  to  the  night.  Innocent's  favorite 
figure  for  illustrating  the  relation  of  church  and  state  was 
taken  from  the  head  and  the  body.  As  the  head  contains 
all  the  faculties  that  control  the  body  so  the  papacy  possesses 
all  prerogatives  necessary  to  rule  the  church. 

The  supremacy  over  both  realms,  which  the  papacy  cov- 

1  Mirbt,  138  sq. 


6  JOHN  HUSS 

eted,  it  got.  If  Gregory  VII's  conflict  with  Henry  IV  ended  in 
a  drawn  battle,  the  conflicts  of  subsequent  pontiffs  with  sec- 
ular princes  had  a  better  issue.  The  house  of  Hohenstaufen 
fought  in  vain  against  their  supreme  jurisdiction  and  so  did 
John  of  England.  The  vaHant  Frederick  Barbarossa  was 
brought  to  terms  by  Alexander  III  at  the  Peace  of  Venice, 
1 177.  The  painting  in  the  doge's  palace  and  another  in  the 
Vatican,  depicting  this  event  on  large  canvases,  represent 
Alexander  sitting  on  a  throne  with  his  feet  on  Barbarossa's 
right  shoulder  as  the  emperor  lies  prostrate.  The  Venetian 
picture  contains  the  words:  "Thou  shalt  tread  upon  the 
lion  and  the  adder,"  Psalm  91  :  13.  The  able  Frederick  II, 
excommunicated  again  and  again  by  two  popes,  and  by  the 
decree  of  Innocent  IV  deprived  of  the  allegiance  of  his  sub- 
jects, died  without  an  army  and  with  his  empire  in  revolt. 
John  of  England,  forced  by  the  interdict  and  the  rebellion  of 
his  nobles,  yielded  his  crown  as  a  fief  to  Innocent  III,  and  for 
the  pledge  of  a  yearly  tribute  to  be  paid  by  himself  and  his 
successors  received  the  crown  back  again. 

Boniface  VIII's  bull  of  1302  exceeded  in  its  arrogant  lan- 
guage the  edicts  of  his  predecessors,  but  not  the  extravagance 
of  their  claim  for  the  apostolic  office.  It  was  issued  at  a  time 
when  the  fresh  atmosphere  of  a  new  age  was  beginning  to  be 
felt.  It  was  a  brave  retort  that  the  king  of  France  made  when 
he  bade  Boniface  remember  that  the  church  was  made  up  of 
laymen  as  well  as  clerics.  The  Catholic  historian,  Cardinal 
Hergenrother,  accurately  presents  the  case  when  he  says  that 
Boniface  did  not  deviate  from  the  paths  of  his  predecessors 
nor  overstep  the  legal  conceptions  of  the  Middle  Ages.^  The 
Unam  sandam  declared  that  in  the  power  of  the  church  lay 
the  two  swords,  the  spiritual  and  the  material;  the  spiritual 
to  be  used  by  the  church,  the  material  for  the  church  and  at 
its  nod.     The  temporal  power,  if  it  deviate  from  the  right 

*  Kirchengesch.,  2  :  597.     Schaff,  V,  2  :  25-29,  gives  the  Latin  text  of  the 
bull  with  English  translation. 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  7 

path,  is  judged  by  the  spiritual,  whose  executive  is  the  pope. 
He  is  subject  alone  to  the  judgment  of  God.  Going  beyond 
this  assertion  of  jurisdiction  over  princes,  Boniface  declared 
that  for  the  salvation  of  every  human  creature  it  is  altogether 
necessary  that  each  be  subject  to  the  Roman  pontiff. 

The  prerogatives  asserted  by  the  popes  were  buttressed 
with  theological  arguments  by  the  corypheus  of  the  School- 
men, Thomas  Aquinas,  d.  1274.  He  took  the  position  that 
as  to  Christ  himself,  so  all  princes  and  kings  are  subject  to 
his  vicar,  the  Roman  pontiff,  and  it  is  necessary  to  salvation 
to  yield  submission  to  the  pope.^  The  language  used  by 
Boniface  was  simply  other  terminology  for  what  the  great 
theologian  had  advocated. 

This  bull  was  a  battle-ground  of  discussion  for  the  next 
two  centuries  and  its  twofold  assertion  the  bomb  which 
helped  to  shatter  the  medieval  theory  of  authority.  WycHf, 
Huss  and  other  writers  referred  to  it  again  and  again  to 
contest  its  truth  and  condemn  its  audacity. 

If  the  absolutism  of  the  papacy  was  doubted  and  discred- 
ited after  1300,  likewise  was  the  theory  of  the  church  as 
elaborated  by  the  Schoolmen.  According  to  them,  the  church 
is  a  visible  institution  for  dispensing  salvation.  Its  bound- 
aries are  the  boundaries  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  on  earth 
and  are  as  distinctly  marked  as  were  the  boundaries  of  the 
republic  of  Venice.  The  sacraments,  which  it  is  in  the  power 
of  the  church  to  administer,  have  an  efficiency  in  themselves 
and,  like  drugs  and  food,  impart  to  the  sinner  spiritual  life 
and  continue  to  maintain  him  in  life.  They  introduce  him 
into  the  kingdom  of  the  faithful,  nourish  him  during  his 
earthly  pilgrimage,  and  with  the  viaticum  and  the  cleansing  of 
the  oil  of  extreme  unction  send  him  on  the  way  to  the  other 
country.     This  sacramental  efficiency  is  dependent  upon  the 

'  Quod  subesse  Romano  pontifici  sit  de  necessitate  salutis. — Schafif,  V,  i  :  674, 
777.  DoUinger  says  that  Thomas  was  the  first  theologian  to  discuss  the  theory 
of  papal  infallibility  as  an  integral  part  of  systems  of  theology. 


8  JOHN  HUSS 

dispensation  of  a  sacerdotal  order  receiving  its  authority  and 
its  grace  by  ordination,  so  that,  no  matter  how  immoral  the 
priest  may  be,  his  words  accompHsh  the  transubstantiation 
of  the  bread  and  wine  and  render  the  other  sacraments  dis- 
pensed by  his  act  efficient  in  the  recipient. 

This  imposing  construction  of  the  church  reared  by 
dexterous  scholastic  reasoning,  which  ignored  entirely  or 
misinterpreted  a  large  body  of  apostoHc  teaching,  was  sub- 
jected to  rational  doubt  and  free  Scriptural  inquiry  after  the 
death  of  Boniface  VIII  and  the  last  of  the  greater  Schoolmen, 
Duns  Scotus,  d.  1308.  The  Schoolmen  subjected  the  reason 
to  church  authority.  They  applied  to  the  Scriptures  no  in- 
dependent investigation.  They  knew  no  Hebrew  or  Greek. 
They  presented  the  opinions  of  the  Fathers,  collecting  them 
into  an  iron-clad  body  of  dogmas.  Their  theological  soph- 
istry threatened  to  bury  the  Scriptures  in  the  tomb  of  doc- 
trinal tradition,  but  men  here  and  there  again  began  to  study 
the  sacred  text  and  to  measure  ecclesiastical  dogmas  by  its 
plain  teaching  and  common  sense.  This  is  what  Wyclif, 
Huss  and  others  did. 

Next  to  the  papacy  and  the  church  the  third  great  elabora- 
tion of  the  period  of  the  Schoolmen  was  the  inquisition,  the 
machinery  for  the  abolition  of  ecclesiastical  dissent.  Heretical 
depravity  it  was  called,  for  heresy  was  not  an  intellectual 
opinion  only:  it  was  depravity.  This  inquisition  followed 
from  the  definition  of  the  prerogatives  of  the  papal  office  and 
the  functions  of  the  church.  Here  the  great  Schoolmen  and 
the  great  popes  again  speak.  To  both  alike,  heresy — that  is, 
dissent  from  the  dogmatic  teachings  issued  by  the  church 
and  disobedience  to  the  rule  of  the  hierarchy — was  a  crime. 
Thomas  Aquinas's  Summa  of  Theology  was  in  full  accord 
with  the  decrees  of  the  Fourth  Lateran  Council  presided  over 
by  Innocent  III,  12 15.  A  heretic,  having  no  rights  in  the 
church,  has  also  no  rights  whatever  on  earth — not  even  the 
right  to  live. 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  9 

The  church  acquired  rights  over  the  individual  by  bap- 
tism and  these  rights  extended  to  the  deprivation  of  life. 
Innocent  likened  heretics  to  Joel's  locusts  and  to  the  foxes 
which  spoil  the  vines.  Like  cUppers  of  coin,  they  are  to 
be  burned,  affirmed  Thomas  Aquinas.  To  quote  this  the- 
ologian: "They  are  not  only  to  be  separated  from  the  church 
by  excommunication  but  also  excluded  from  the  world  by 
death."  The  spiritual  authority  might  consign  heretics  to 
perpetual  imprisonment,  and,  as  it  was  forbidden  to  execute 
the  death  penalty,  it  turned  them  over  to  the  civil  tribunal 
with  the  full  understanding  that  they  were  to  be  punished,  if 
necessary,  unto  death.  This  penalty  it  made  sure  by  threat- 
ening with  extreme  church  punishments  civil  tribunals  which 
failed  to  administer  it.  The  codes  of  Frederick  II  and  the 
law  of  Louis  IX  of  France  enacted  that  heretics  condemned 
by  the  church  should  be  executed  out  of  the  world. ^ 

These  three  institutions — papal  absolutism,  the  church  as 
an  organization  dispensing  Hfe  and  the  absolute  right  to  dis- 
pose of  heretics  by  death,  inherited  from  the  age  of  the  great 
popes  and  the  great  Schoolmen — controlled  the  official  thought 
of  Western  Europe  until  attacked  by  Luther.  Six  months 
before  he  nailed  up  his  theses,  Leo  X  solemnly  reaffirmed  the 
pretensions  of  Boniface  VIII's  famous  bull.  But  in  the  mean- 
time these  three  institutions  were  questioned  or  openly  as- 
sailed by  individuals  who  may  be  grouped  in  five  different 
groups.  To  one  of  these  groups  John  Huss  belonged,  and  he 
represented  the  attack  against  all  these  three  institutions,  the 
papal  monarchy,  the  church,  and  the  inquisition.  In  this 
opposition  there  was  a  movement  running  in  the  direction  of 
the  recognition  of  the  supreme  authority  of  Scripture  and 
the  rights  of  conscience,  for  both  of  which  Huss  stood. 

The  first  of  these  groups  was  the  group  of  pamphleteers 

'  Dollinger-Reusch,  Card.  Bellarmin,  says  that  at  the  demand  of  Gregory 
IX  the  Roman  senator  took  an  oath  to  seize  heretics  pointed  out  by  the  in- 
quisition and  to  put  them  to  death  within  eight  days  of  their  ecclesiastical 
sentence. 


lo  JOHN  HUSS 

who  flourished  in  the  first  half  of  the  fourteenth  century  and 
assailed  first  the  temporal  claims  of  the  papacy  and  then  its 
spiritual  claims.  Its  most  eminent  representative  was  Dante, 
d.  132 1,  who  in  his  tract  entitled  Monarchy,  and  in  other 
writings,  wrote  in  favor  of  the  independent  authority  of 
the  empire  and  the  supremacy  of  its  jurisdiction  within  the 
civil  sphere.  He  accepted  the  accuracy  of  the  tradition  that 
Constantine,  in  reward  for  his  baptism  by  Sylvester  and  his 
recovery  from  leprosy  by  that  pope's  cure,  bestowed  upon  the 
pope  the  government  of  Rome  and  all  the  regions  of  the  West. 
This  falsehood  was  distributed  through  Europe  about  850 
by  the  spurious  Isidorian  Decretals  and  was  for  centuries  be- 
lieved to  be  as  true  as  the  Gospels  themselves.  It  was  not 
until  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century  that  Laurentius  Valla 
proved  the  whole  story  a  fraud.  Dante  went  no  further  than 
to  pronounce  Constantine  incompetent  to  bestow  such  power 
upon  a  pope.  That  right  belonged  to  God  alone,  who  had 
made  the  two  spheres  distinct.  He  rejected  the  figure  com- 
paring the  two  powers  respectively  to  the  sun  and  the  moon. 
His  famous  lines  might  well  have  been  quoted  by  Huss  in  his 
Treatise  on  the  Church,  where  he  emphasized  the  ills  which 
had  come  to  it  through  Constantine's  fictitious  gift. 

"  Oh  !  Constantine,  how  much  ill  was  cause 
Not  thy  conversion,  but  those  rich  domains 
Which  the  first  wealthy  pope  received  of  thee." 

— Inferno,  19  :  115, 

Dante  freely  put  popes  in  hell,  including  the  simoniac 
Boniface  VIII. 

In  France,  moved  by  the  controversy  which  Philip  IV 
was  having  with  Boniface,  the  Dominican  John  of  Paris, 
d.  1306,  and  jurisconsults  like  Peter  Dubois,  d.  after  132 1, 
struck  the  same  note.  These  publicists  insisted  the  church 
should  keep  itself  clear  of  "Herod's  old  error" ^  and  follow 

'  Scholz,  Puhlizistik,  etc.,  p.  315. 


i— 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  ii 

Christ  who,  in  his  earthly  career,  disclaimed  worldly  author- 
ity. John  refuted  forty-two  reasons  given  for  the  pope's 
omnipotence  in  temporal  affairs.  The  pope  is  the  representa- 
tive of  the  church,  not  its  lord,  appointed  to  be  the  moral 
teacher  of  mankind  and  the  overseer  of  men's  spiritual  con- 
cerns. The  contrary  view,  the  view  of  Innocent  III,  was 
represented  by  other  publicists  who  were  concerned  to  de- 
fend Boniface's  bull  and  memory.  Amongst  those  who  went 
farthest  were  Alexander  Triumphus  and  Alvarus  Pelayo,  who 
ascribed  infallibility  to  the  pope  and  extended  his  jurisdic- 
tion beyond  the  confines  of  Christendom  and  over  the  heathen. 
Along  the  line  of  this  contention  was  the  action  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Vienne,  13 12,  which  forbade  sovereigns  to  allow  their 
Mohammedan  subjects  to  exercise  the  ritual  of  their  religion.^ 
Hergenrother  and  Pastor  complain  that  Alexander  Triumphus 
carried  matters  beyond  the  limits  of  truth,  making  the  pope 
a  semi-god,  the  absolute  ruler  of  the  world. 

The  attack  upon  the  theocratic  pretensions  of  the  papacy 
was  followed  by  an  assault  upon  the  supreme  spiritual  func- 
tions claimed  for  it  and  the  priesthood.  This  group  of  pam- 
phleteers had  its  chief  representatives  in  Marsiglius  of  Padua 
and  John  of  Jandun.  In  part  Ockam  also  agreed  with  them. 
These  all  supported  the  claims  of  Lewis  the  Bavarian  in  his 
conflict  with  John  XXII  and  John's  two  successors.  Mar- 
siglius has  been  called  by  eminent  Catholic  historians,  Dol- 
linger.  Pastor  and  Funk,  a  forerunner  of  Luther  and  Calvin. 
With  great  clearness  he  asserted  some  of  the  essentials  of  the 
Protestant  Reformation,  and  in  some  respects  he  went  beyond 
the  Reformers,  as  when  he  declared  that  the  people  them- 
selves are  the  source  of  authority  and  select  their  own  rulers. 
His  tract  Defensor  pads — Defender  of  the  Peace — is  a  bold 
manifesto  against  the  hierarchical  organization  of  the  church. 
The  pope's  claim  of  plenitude  of  power  contradicts  the  true 
nature  and  idea  of  the  church.  The  highest  earthly  tribunal 
'  Schaff,  V,  I  :  519. 


12  JOHN  HUSS 

in  church  matters  is  the  general  council.    Laymen  have  the 
right  to  sit  in  it  as  well  as  clerics.    The  orders  of  bishop,  priest 
and  deacon  are  of  human  origin.     The  function  of  binding 
and  loosing  is  declarative,  not  judicial.     The  right  to  inflict 
penalties  Ues  with  the  Christian  congregation,  the  body  of 
Christian  believers.    The  Scriptures  are  the  ultimate  seat  of 
authority.    John  XXII,  1327,  condemned  the  tract  as  con- 
trary to  apostolic  truth  and  declared  its  reputed  joint  authors, 
Marsighus  and  John  of  Jandun,  sons  of  perdition,  sons  of 
Belial,  pestiferous  men,  beasts  from  the  abyss.^    Marsiglius 
was  equal  to  the  pope  in  finding  forcible  epithets  and  de- 
nounced John  as  the  great  dragon,  the  old  serpent.     It  is 
I  remarkable  how  short  a  time  had  elapsed  between  Thomas 
[Aquinas,  the  great  architect  of  the  mediseval  system  of  the 
)church  and  papacy,  and  these  violent  democratic  assaults. 
The  second  group,  the  German  mystics,  disparaged  the 
^^    mediaeval  system  by  their  habits  of  piety  rather  than  by  their 
'^^    writings.     They  breathed  a  different  atmosphere  from  the 
Schoolmen  and  lived  apart  from  the  conflict  over  worldly 
authority.     This  remarkable  body  of  men,   preaching  and 
spreading  by  example  the  precepts  of  practical  Christianity, 
.  did  not  openly  attack  a  single  dogma  of  the  church.     They 
had  nothing  to  say  about  its  outward  constitution  or  the  sacra- 
ments.   Nevertheless,  in  the  person  of  Meister  Eckart,  they 
brought  upon  themselves  condemnation  from  the  pope  him- 
self, and,  in  the  persons  of  Hugo  de  Groote  and  other  leaders 
of  the  movement  from  the  Lowlands,  they  called  forth  sus- 
picion and  attacks  from  the  Franciscan  order.     The  move- 
ment was  in  the  interest  of  personal  piety  and  every-day 
Christianity.    These  men  walked  in  secluded  paths  of  spiritual 
devotion.     They  preached  in  the  vernacular  tongue.     They 
taught  schools.     They  wrote  tracts  on  the  immediate  com- 
munion of  the  soul  with  Christ.     They  copied  manuscripts. 
Their  teachings  were  opposed  to  the  dogmatic  method  of 

'  For  John's  bull,  see  Mirbt,  166. 


THE  AGE  IN   WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  13 

the  Schoolmen.  The  little  book  called  The  German  Theology 
and  also  Tauler's  sermons  influenced  Luther.  GodHness 
is  more  than  a  doctrine,  more  than  a  ritual.  It  is  a  state 
of  the  soul,  a  habit  of  daily  conduct.  In  the  soul  religion  is 
to  be  sought,  not  in  outward  sacramental  conformities.  The 
word  conversion — Kehr — was  coined  anew,  and  the  thing  it^ 
represented  was  in  fact,  though  not  professedly,  opposed  to 
sacramentarianism.  They  insisted  upon  separation  from  the 
world  in  contrast  to  separation  from  society,  upon  the  son- 
ship  of  believers,  upon  love  and  simple  faith,  upon  walking 
with  God.  "wisdom,"  said  Tauler,  ''is  not  studied  in  Paris 
but  in  the  sufferings  of  the  Lord.  The  great  masters  of  Paris 
read  large  books  and  that  is  well;  but  people  who  dwell  in 
the  inner  kingdom  of  the  soul  read  the  true  book  of  life.  A 
pure  heart  is  the  throne  of  the  supreme  judge,  a  lamp  bearing 
eternal  light,  the  sanctuary  of  the  only-begotten  Son." 
Glorifying  all  honest  daily  occupations,  he  says:  "One  can  spin, 
another  make  shoes,  and  all  these  are  the  gifts  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  I  tell  you,  if  I  were  not  a  priest,  I  should  esteem  it  a 
great  gift  to  be  able  to  mend  shoes,  and  I  would  try  to  make 
them  well  so  as  to  be  a  pattern  to  all."  It  was  better,  one 
of  them  said,  to  have  simple  faith  than  to  pry  into  the  secrets 
of  God.     Whittier  makes  known  their  spirit  in  the  lines: 

"God  has  sent  the  man 
Long  sought,  to  teach  me,  by  his  simple  faith 
Wisdom  the  weary  Schoolmen  never  knew." 

As  Loofs  has  well  said:  "  German  mysticism  emphasized  above 
all  dogmas  and  external  acts  the  necessity  of  the  new  birth."  •• 
Their  names  have  no  place  in  the  records  of  councils,  but  the 
soil  on  which  they  labored  and  built  their  schools  was  the  soil 
on  which  German  Protestantism  sprang  up. 

A  third  group  of  men,  who  flourished  in  this  period  of  two 
hundred  years,  were  the  Humanists.    In  Italy  first  they  broke 

^  Dogmengeschichte,  p.  631. 


14  JOHN  HUSS 

a  new  path  for  intellectual  culture  and  freedom.  The  classic 
literature  of  Greece  and  Rome,  the  church,  following  the  ban 
of  St.  Jerome,  had  taught  for  nearly  a  thousand  years,  was 
an  unclean  thing.  All  Christians  were  to  keep  away  from  the 
infection.  Under  the  impulse  of  Dante,  Petrarch  and  Boc- 
caccio other  studies  than  the  study  of  theology  came  into 
vogue.  Scholars  turned  with  deUght  to  the  artistic  and 
literary  treasures  of  the  Old  World,  to  its  mythology  and 
history.  They  discovered  again  the  wonders  and  beauties 
of  the  earth  around  them.  They  made  the  Italian  the  avenue 
of  their  thought  and  prepared  the  way  for  the  breaking  up  of 
the  monopoly  of  ecclesiastical  Latin.  Nicholas  V  and  other 
popes  joined  with  the  Medicis  of  Florence  and  other  noble 
families  in  patronizing  the  new  culture  and  collecting  li- 
braries and  treasures  of  art.  The  North,  learning  from  Italy, 
added  some  new  elements,  and  Reuchlin  and  Erasmus  started 
Hebrew  and  Greek  scholarship  on  its  modern  paths  and  en- 
gaged in  the  study  of  the  Bible,  as  the  Southern  Humanists 
had  not. 

A  fourth  group  of  men,  produced  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  included  the  ecclesiastical  and  discipli- 
nary reformers.  They  are  associated  with  the  great  Reforma- 
tory councils,  Pisa,  Constance  and  Basel,  1409-1449.  With 
the  aid  of  discipline  and  law  they  sought  to  correct  abuses 
which  prevailed  in  the  church.  In  incisive  pamphlets  they 
set  forth  the  ills  of  Christendom  and  agreed  upon  a  general 
council  as  the  means  for  curing  them.  The  principle  that  such 
council,  representing  the  whole  church,  is  above  the  pope, 
advocated  by  Ockam,  was  taken  up  and  presented  with 
conciseness  and  clearness  by  Konrad  of  Gelnhausen.  He 
was  followed  in  the  same  path  by  such  men  as  Henry  of  Lan- 
genstein,  Gerson,  d'Ailly  and  Nieheim.  The  discussion 
centred  in  the  university  of  Paris,  which  became  the  influen- 
tial sponsor  of  the  supremacy  of  councils.  With  this  group  of 
ecclesiastical  reformers  the  question  was  one  of  the  adminis- 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  15 

tration  of  the  church.  For  fifty  years  Europe  was  turned 
into  a  parliament  which  listened  to  the  arguments  of  famous 
teachers  on  the  questions  of  disciplinary  reform. 

With  the  names  of  the  men  of  these  four  groups  and  the 
principles  for  which  they  stood  Huss  must  have  been  well  ac- 
quainted. The  subjects  of  their  tracts  were  the  primary  issues 
of  their  times.  Huss  probably  read  a  large  number  of  them, 
written  from  the  date  of  Boniface's  death  down  to  his  own 
day.  Although  he  repeatedly  cites  Boniface's  bull  and  com- 
ments upon  it,  it  may  seem  strange  to  us  that  he  did  not 
quote  some  of  these  writers  by  name.  But  in  neglecting  to 
do  so,  he  was  following  the  custom  of  the  fifteenth  century 
in  regard  to  quotations. 

The  fifth  group  were  the  reformers  before  the  Reformation, 
men  whose  paths  led  far  away  from  the  principles  of  the  medi- 
aeval church.  They  urged  the  principles  of  the  pamphleteers 
who  assailed  the  papacy.  They  insisted  on  personal  piety. 
They  urged  church  reforms.  But  more,  they  were  dogmatic 
innovators.  They  were  widely  separated  in  time  and  their 
spheres  of  activity— WycHf  in  England,  Huss  in  Bohemia, 
Savonarola  in  Italy,  and  Goch,  Wesel  and  Wessel  in  North- 
western Germany — yet  they  agreed  in  essential  particulars, 
if  we  except  Savonarola,  whose  demands  for  reform  were 
political  and  moral.  Nevertheless,  by  resisting  the  pope's 
authority  and  appealing  to  the  decision  of  a  general  council, 
and  by  holding  forth  the  Scriptures  prominently  in  the  pulpit, 
Savonarola  has  a  place  in  this  group.  He  was  burned  as  a 
heretic,  1498,  after  being  officially  separated  from  the  church. 
The  artist  who  constructed  the  monument  of  the  Reformation 
at  Worms  did  not  go  astray  in  placing  him  at  the  side  of  Wyclif, 
Huss  and  Peter  Waldo  at  the  feet  of  Martin  Luther. 

Wyclif  and  Huss,  however,  were  the  arch-heretics  of  this 
period  who  opposed  the  three  mediaeval  constructions — the 
papacy,  the  church  and  the  inquisition.  Relying  upon 
Augustine's  definition  that  the  church  is  the  body  of  the  elect. 


i6  JOHN  HUSS 

they  contested  the  proposition  that  what  the  visible  church 
teaches  must  be  beHeved  because  the  church  teaches  it.  They 
turned  away  from  an  infalHble  pope  and  an  infalHble  visible 
church  to  the  living  Christ,  who  rules  personally  in  the  hearts 
of  believers  and  in  the  Scriptures.  They  questioned  or  denied 
the  church's  right  to  punish  heretics  and  schismatics  with 
physical  punishments. 

During  the  narrower  period  of  Huss's  life  two  movements 
of  unusual  importance  were  going  on  in  the  history  of  Latin 
Christendom,  the  Avignon  exile  and  the  papal  schism.  Both 
threatened  the  continuation  of  the  papacy  and  the  unity  of  the 
Western  church.  Huss  was  born  during  the  Avignon  exile, 
and  he  lived  through  the  entire  period  of  the  papal  schism, 
1377-1417.  Two  years  after  the  death  of  Boniface  VIII, 
1303,  the  transfer  of  the  papacy  from  Rome  to  Avignon  was 
accomplished.  The  bitter  conflict  between  Boniface  and 
Philip  the  Fair,  a  conflict  which  Philip  continued  to  wage 
against  Boniface's  memory  after  the  pope's  death,  was  the 
occasion  of  the  removal  of  the  papal  residence  to  the  banks 
of  the  Rhone.  During  the  seventy  years  that  the  papacy  con- 
tinued there,  the  popes  were  all  Frenchmen  and  little  more 
than  French  court-bishops.  Frenchmen  constituted  the  large 
majority  in  the  sacred  college.  The  venality  that  was  prac- 
tised in  the  papal  household  at  Avignon  and  the  moral  cor- 
ruption of  the  place  won  for  it  from  contemporaries  the  name 
of  the  third  Babylon.  Church  ofi&ces  were  set  for  sale  and 
lucrative  livings  were  filled  before  their  incumbents  were 
dead,  two  or  even  three  ecclesiastics  paying  for  the  right  of 
succession  and  standing,  as  it  were,  in  line  until  the  living  in- 
cumbent died  and  the  others,  one  by  one,  filled  out  their 
turns.  These  provisions  and  reservations,  as  they  were 
called,  and  the  constant  appeal  of  all  sorts  of  cases  from  every 
quarter  to  the  apostolic  see  made  the  Avignon  court  the 
scene  of  constant  intrigue  and  bribery.  The  turbulent  state 
of  Italy  and  the  fear  that  papal  territory  might  be  lost  to 


THE  AGE  IN  WHICH  HUSS  LIVED  17 

the  patrimony  of  St.  Peter,  even  more  than  the  appeals  of 
Petrarch  and  the  prophetic  voices  of  Brigitta  of  Sweden  and 
Catherine  of  Siena,  induced  the  last  Avignon  pope,  Gregory 
XI,  to  visit  Rome.  Gregory,  the  pope  whom  Wyclif  called  "a 
terrible  devil,"  died  unwilHngly  at  Rome  and  while  he  was 
contemplating  a  return  to  France. 

The  papal  schism,  which  followed  upon  Gregory's  death, 
was  a  far  greater  misfortune  than  the  Avignon  exile.  Follow- 
ing the  rule  that  the  papal  election  take  place  where  the  pope 
dies,  and  overawed  by  the  threats  of  the  Roman  populace, 
which  demanded  an-  Italian  pope,  the  curia  elected  the  arch- 
bishop of  Bari,  known  as  Urban  VI.  Of  the  twenty  cardinals 
at  that  time  in  Rome  sixteen  were  Frenchmen  and  only  four 
Italians.  Urban  was  incapable  of  rising  to  his  great  oppor- 
tunity, and  by  his  self-will  and  disregard  of  every  dictate  of 
prudence,  he  himself  became  a  refugee  and  exile.  The  French 
cardinals,  refusing  to  acquiesce  in  his  election,  chose  the  no- 
torious Robert  of  Geneva,  who  assumed  the  name  of  Clement 
VII  and  continued  the  papal  court  at  Avignon.  The  two 
popes — one  on  the  Tiber  and  one  on  the  Rhone — hurled  the 
anathema  one  at  the  other,  and  Western  Europe  for  forty  years 
witnessed  the  scandal  of  two  earthly  heads  of  the  church  and 
was  divided  between  two  "obediences."  As  a  result  many 
dioceses  were  divided  in  their  allegiance  and  had  rival  bishops, 
as  was  the  case  with  Mainz,  Liege,  Basel,  Constance,  Chur, 
and  other  dioceses.  Pastor  has  said:  "The  papal  schism  was 
the  greatest  misfortune  which  could  have  befallen  the  church." 
The  best  talent  of  the  age,  as  already  intimated,  was  devoted 
to  the  discussion  of  methods  for  the  abolition  of  the  schism 
and  the  reunion  of  Christendom.  Bohemia,  to  which  Huss 
belonged,  was  true  to  the  Roman  line,  but  an  element  of  un- 
certainty in  its  religious  affairs  resulted  from  the  constant 
efforts  of  the  Avignon  popes  to  attract  the  allegiance  of  its 
king  to  themselves.  With  the  example  of  the  universities  of 
Paris  and  Oxford  before  it,  the  new  university  of  Prague  was 


k 


i8  JOHN  HUSS 

compelled  to  investigate  the  foundations  of  the  papal  office 
and  the  place  which  the  supreme  pontiff  occupied  in  the 
church. 

During  this  most  critical  period  of  the  papal  schism  Huss 
was  a  student  at  the  university  and  an  active  participant  in 
the  church  affairs  of  his  people.  With  the  propositions  which 
came  from  the  university  of  Paris  and  from  individuals  in- 
tended to  heal  the  schism  he  must  have  been  thoroughly 
familiar.  The  Reformatory  council  of  Pisa,  summoned,  1409, 
to  accomplish  this  result,  was  held  when  he  was  in  the  full 
tide  of  his  activity  and  its  debates  he  must  have  followed 
with  intense  interest.  In  the  presence  of  the  second  Reforma- 
tory council,  the  council  of  Constance,  which  brought  about 
the  deposition  of  three  popes  and  elected  a  fourth,  he  himself 
stood;    however,  as  a  prisoner  under  trial  for  his  life. 


CHAPTER  II 
HUSS  AND    THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL 

Johannes  Htiss  lingua  potens  el  mundioris  vita  opinione  clarus. 
— .^neas  Sylvius,  Hisl.  Boh.,  chap.  35. 
Huss,  forcible  of  speech  and  distinguished  by  the  reputation  of  a 
pure  life.^ 

John  Huss  was  born  in  Husinecz,  a  village  in  Southern 
Bohemia,  near  the-  Bavarian  frontier,  about  the  year  1373, 
and  died  at  the  stake  in  Constance,  July  6,  141 5.  The  year 
1369,  which  has  sometimes  been  given  as  the  year  of  Huss's 
birth,  seems  to  be  too  early,  for  it  would  necessitate  Huss's 
being  thirty-two  years  old  at  the  time  of  his  ordination  to  the 
priesthood,  the  canonical  age  being  twenty-five.^  The  exact 
day  of  Huss's  birth  we  have  no  means  of  determining,  and  the 
sixth  of  July,  observed  by  the  Catholic  population  in  parts 
of  Bohemia,  seems  to  have  been  suggested  by  the  day  on 
which  his  death  occurred.  Usually  he  signed  his  name  John 
Hus.  In  official  documents  it  was  given  as  Magister  or  even 
Doctor  Johannes  of  Husinecz.  The  custom  of  associating 
the  place  of  birth  with  the  Christian  name  was  common,  as 
in  the  cases  of  John  Wyclif,  John  Gerson  and  John  Rokyzan. 
The  Czech  word  hus  means  goose  and  it  was  made  the  oc- 
casion of  many  a  pun  by  Huss  himself  as  well  as  by  his  friends. 
A  friend  writing  about  him  from  Constance  said  that  the 
Goose  was  not  yet  cooked  and  not  afraid  of  being  cooked,  and 

^  The  comparative,  mundioris  seems  to  indicate  an  advance  upon  Huss's 
force  of  speech.  A  distinguished  professor  of  Latin  suggests  the  trsl.  "  a  sin- 
gularly pure  life,"  citing  Cicero,  Calo  Major,  who  speaks  of  old  age  as  loquacior, 
particularly  talkative. 

-  Palacky  and  Tomek  accept  1369,  but  Loserth,  Wiclif  and  Hus,  p.  67, 
Gillett  and  Liitzow,  1373.  Flajshans,  p.  12,  inclines  to  1373,  although  he  says 
the  date  may  have  been  as  late  as  1376.  Huss  was  baccalaureus,  1393,  the  re- 
quired age  being  sixteen.  Flajshans,  p.  42,  giving  the  different  old  spellings  of 
Huss's  name  says  he  is  called  J.  Huss  de  Hussinecz  in  a  court  document,  June 
2,  1402. 

19 


20  JOHN  HUSS 

Huss  wrote:  "If  you  love  your  poor  Goose,  see  to  it  that  the 
king  sends  him  guards."^ 

Of  Huss's  boyhood  and  his  university  career  our  knowl- 
edge is  scant.  His  parents  were  poor  but  not  in  necessitous 
circumstances.^  His  father,  whose  name  was  John,  died  when 
he  was  a  child,  and,  according  to  Flajshans,  the  son  was  called 
in  his  youth  after  his  father,  Jan  Michaluv.  His  mother 
seems  to  have  devoted  much  attention  to  her  son's  care  and 
was  wont  to  accompany  him  to  school.  Later  she  went  with 
him  to  Prague,  when  he  entered  upon  his  university  career. 
He  had  brothers  whom  he  recalled  with  affection  in  his  last 
days,  and  one  of  these  brothers  had  sons  whom  Huss,  writing 
shortly  before  his  death,  commended  for  a  trade,  as  they 
seemed  to  him  not  to  be  fitted  for  the  spiritual  office.  Of 
his  school  Hfe  at  Prachaticz,  a  neighboring  town  to  his  birth- 
place, we  know  no  details  with  certainty.  The  exact  date  of 
his  entrance  upon  his  studies  in  the  university  of  Prague  is 
uncertain,  though  it  was  probably  1389.  There  he  studied  in 
the  department  of  the  arts  and  philosophy  and  also  theology. 
From  this  time  on  we  find  his  name  spelled  Jan  of  Husinecz. 
To  use  the  technical  language  of  the  time,  he  was  promoted 
to  the  degree  of  B.A.  1393,  B.D.  1394,  and  M.A.  1396.  Huss 
never  reached  the  doctorate  of  theology  and,  until  the  end, 
called  himself  bachelor  of  sacred  theology  or  as  in  his  let- 
ters Magister  J.  Hus.  He  helped  to  support  himself  by  sing- 
ing on  the  streets  and  in  churches,  as  Luther  did  a  hundred 
years  later.  His  piety  and  his  poverty  are  ahke  attested  by 
his  purchase  of  a  pardon  at  the  sale  of  indulgences  at  the 
Wyssehrad  in  the  Prague  jubilee  year  1393.  He  says  that 
he  spent  his  last  four  pennies  in  purchasing  the  certificate  of 
forgiveness.  Referring  probably  to  the  years  before  his  ma- 
triculation at  the  university,  he  notes  in  his  Bohemian  Com- 

^  Doc,  80,  100. 

2  Palacky,  Gesch.,  3  :  191.  According  to  Flajshans,  Husinecz  had  a  popu- 
lation of  1,800.  For  the  scanty  legends  of  Huss's  life,  see  this  author's  Life, 
p.  22. 


HUSS  AND   THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL        21 

mentary  on  the  Decalogue  that  when  he  was  a  hungry  little 
student  he  made  a  spoon  out  of  bread  and  ate  the  peas  with 
it  and  then  ate  the  spoon  also. 

It  would  seem  that  Huss  was  not  a  remarkable  student, 
as  the  university  lists  put  him  midway  in  the  groups  receiving 
degrees.  A  statement  in  one  of  his  letters  reports  that,  be- 
fore he  entered  the  priesthood,  he  was  fond  of  playing  chess, 
and  he  thought  it  necessary  to  confess  that  he  had  frittered 
away  time  and  provoked  both  himself  and  others  to  anger  over 
the  game.  University  students  at  Prague  had  to  run  the 
gauntlet.  It  was  a  common  thing  for  loose  women  to  frequent 
the  houses  where  students  roomed  and  even  to  take  permanent 
lodgings  in  them.^  It  is  fair  to  assume  that  Huss's  private 
life  was  above  reproach.  Even  down  to  the  last  moments  in  | 
Constance  no  charge  was  ever  brought  against  his  character. 
The  withering  public  attacks  he  made  against  vicious  clerics 
from  the  earliest  period  of  his  pubHc  activity  failed  to  call 
forth  a  single  charge  against  his  personal  purity.  This  judg- 
ment is  also  borne  out  by  the  warm  personal  friendship  of 
people  of  all  classes,  which  he  enjoyed  from  the  mechanic  to 
the  highest  nobles  of  the  realm,  men  before  whom  his  life 
was  as  an  open  book,  ^neas  Sylvius,  afterward  Pius  II,  in 
describing  Huss's  death,  spoke  of  him  as  distinguished  for  the 
reputation  of  a  Hfe  of  purity— a  remarkable  testimony  from  a 
man  whose  record  was  marked  by  illicit  amours,  and  who  was 
severe  upon  Huss's  heresy  and  the  Hussites. 

In  1401  we  find  Huss  lecturing  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  -| 

the  Lombard.    A  proof  of  the  respect  in  which  he  was  held  ! 

was  his  election  the  same  year  as  dean  of  the  faculty  of  phi- 
losophy, and  a  still  greater  proof  was  his  election,  in  1402,  to 
the  office  of  rector  of  the  university,  a  position  he  at  that 
time  filled  for  six  months.    The  qualities  of  eloquence,  moral  \^' 

elevation  and  personal  magnetism  ascribed  to  him  at  a  later         /   K 
period  must  already  have  had  prominent  exercise  to  explain 
^  Tomek,  as  quoted  by  Liitzow,  p.  69. 


22  JOHN  HUSS 

this  gift  of  the  highest  university  distinction.  He  was  a 
marked  man  in  the  eyes  of  students  and  faculties. 

Huss  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  in  1401,  His  own 
statement  that  in  preparing  for  the  clerical  office  he  had  had 
in  mind  the  safe  shelter  and  goodly  apparel  a  comfortable 
living  would  bring  him  must  not  be  taken  to  exclude  higher 
motives.  His  first  sermons,  so  far  as  we  know,  were  delivered 
in  St.  Michael's  church.  Bernard,  its  incumbent,  Huss  at  a 
later  date  pronounced  "a  very  great  enemy  of  the  Word  of 
God."  At  times  he  dined  with  Bernard,  and  a  remark  made 
on  one  of  these  occasions  was  made  the  subject  of  a  charge 
against  him  at  Constance,  that  he  held  to  the  remanence  of  the 
substance  of  the  bread  and  wine  after  the  words  of  institu- 
tion at  the  Lord's  Supper. 

In  the  year  1402  Huss's  career  as  a  preacher  began  with 
his  appointment  to  the  pulpit  of  the  Holy  Innocents  at 
Bethlehem.  The  young  priest,  not  thirty  years  old,  was 
soon  one  of  the  most  noted  popular  preachers  of  his  century 
and  the  chief  ecclesiastical  figure  of  his  own  country.  The 
Holy  Innocents  became  the  conspicuous  religious  centre  in 
the  city  of  Prague.  Huss's  voice  reached  men  of  all  classes, 
from  the  king  to  the  beggar,  cleric  and  lay.  He  exalted  his 
office  and,  in  using  the  title  bachelor  of  divinity,  often  coupled 
with  it  the  title,  "rector  and  preacher  of  the  chapel  of  the 
Holy  Innocents  of  Bethlehem  in  the  old  and  large  city  of 
Prague."  1 

Prague — Praha  in  the  Czech — with  which  Huss's  name 
is  as  closely  associated  as  Savonarola  with  Florence,  Calvin 
with  Geneva,  or  Knox  with  Edinburgh,  has  from  time  im- 
memorial been  the  metropoHs  and  capital  city  of  Bohemia. 
This  land,  with  nearly  seven  millions  of  people,  almost  sur- 
rounded by  mountain  ranges,  and  watered  by  the  river 
Moldau  and  other  streams,  is  a  part  of  the  Austrian  empire. 
The  national  Slavic  feefing  of  the  people  is  bound  up  with 
'  Doc,  387,  466,  etc. 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   23 

the  Czech  language  and  Bohemia's  former  history  as  an  in- 
dependent kingdom.  The  land  was  the  meeting-place  of 
Slav  and  German.  In  Huss's  day  a  considerable  and  in- 
fluential part  of  the  population  of  Prague  was  German,  and 
the  conflicts  between  the  elements  were  frequent.  Since  1848, 
when  a  certain  freedom  of  administration  was  accorded,  the 
German  element  has  sensibly  declined.  Now  scarcely  a  fifth 
of  the  population  is  German,  and  to  a  visitor  the  signs  over 
the  shops  and  the  conversation  in  the  streets  seem  to  be  al- 
most exclusively  in  Czech. 

The  Christianization  of  the  land  dates  from  the  baptism 
of  the  Bohemian  prince  Borivoj,  873,  under  the  preaching  of 
the  Eastern  missionary,  Methodius,  who  with  his  fellow  mis- 
sionary Cyrillus,  had  labored  in  Moravia.  A  century  later 
the  influence  of  the  Eastern  church  gave  way  to  the  authority 
of  Rome  and,  973,  the  bishopric  of  Prague  was  founded  with 
Adalbert  as  the  first  bishop.  It  was  at  first  a  part  of  the  arch- 
diocese of  Regensburg  and  then  of  Mainz.  In  1344,  Prague 
became  an  independent  archbishopric.  In  Huss's  time  it 
included  the  sees  of  Olmiitz  and  Leitomysl.  The  old  national 
saints  are  Ludmilla  and  Wenceslaus.  Stress  is  laid  by  Russian 
historians  on  the  Eastern  origin  of  Czech  Christianity,  and  the 
Hussite  movement  has  even  been  portrayed  as  a  partial  re- 
turn to  that  type  as  seen  in  the  restoration  of  the  cup  to 
the  laity.  The  Bohemian  clergy,  it  seems,  continued  to  be 
married  until  the  thirteenth  century,  when  the  Roman  rule 
of  celibacy  was  enforced. 

In  1088  the  royal  crown  was  conferred  by  the  emperor 
Henry  IV  on  the  Bohemian  prince  Wratislav  for  the  support 
he  rendered  Henry  in  the  conflict  with  Gregory  VII  over 
investiture.  The  royal  title  became  hereditary  with  Premysl, 
who  was  crowned  in  1198,  and  it  remained  in  his  house  until 
the  assassination  of  Wenceslaus  III  in  1306.  During  the 
period  of  Huss's  activity  the  house  of  Luxemburg  ruled  in 
Bohemia.      John  of  Luxemburg,  the  father  of  the  emperor 


24  JOHN  HUSS 

Charles  IV,  was  elected  king  by  the  Bohemians.  This 
dynasty  became  extinct  in  Sigismund,  who  occupies  a  place  of 
great  prominence  in  Huss's  last  fortunes  at  Constance.  From 
the  date  of  his  death,  1437,  except  at  short  intervals,  the  king- 
dom has  been  subject  to  the  house  of  Hapsburg. 

The  Bohemian  ruler,  in  whose  reign  Huss  was  born, 
Charles  IV,  1346-1378,  was  the  most  conspicuous  political 
figure  of  his  age  and  Bohemia's  chief  princely  benefactor.  His 
reign  is  looked  back  to  as  the  golden  era  of  his  country.  Never 
before  or  since  has  its  prosperity  been  more  generally  acknowl- 
edged or  its  influence  in  Europe  so  appreciable.  Seven  years 
of  residence  at  the  court  of  his  uncle,  the  king  of  France,  gave 
the  prince  opportunity  to  become  acquainted  with  the  cul- 
ture of  Western  Europe.  As  Roman  emperor  he  issued  the 
famous  Golden  Bull,  1356,  which  determined  the  rules  for 
the  election  to  the  imperial  crown.  The  document  imposed 
the  duty  of  summoning  the  seven  electors  and  presiding  over 
their  deliberations  upon  the  archbishop  of  Mainz,  and  the 
right  to  crown  the  emperor  on  the  archbishop  of  Cologne. 
The  elections  were  to  take  place  at  Frankfurt.  Of  the  four 
lay  electors,  the  king  of  Bohemia  was  made  cupbearer,  and  the 
Count  Palatine,  the  duke  of  Saxony,  and  the  margrave  of 
Brandenburg  respectively  seneschal,  marshal,  and  chamber- 
lain of  the  empire.^ 

During  Charles's  reign,  Prague  was  transformed  into  one 
of  the  notable  capitals  of  Europe.  That  sovereign  encour- 
aged literature  and  the  arts  and  laid  the  foundations  of  the 
massive  palace  on  the  Hradcany  hill — Hradschin.  He  built 
convents  and  churches  and  constructed  the  bridge  across  the 
Moldau,  one  of  the  architectural  wonders  of  the  age,  which 
still  remains,  after  the  passage  of  five  centuries,  the  chief 
medium  of  commerce  between  the  two  parts  of  the  city. 
Early  in  his  reign  Charles  was  in  correspondence  with  Petrarch, 

'  Bryce,  Holy  Roman  Empire,  p.  231,  who  quotes  from  Marsiglius  and 
Schiller. 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   25 

the  leading  literary  figure  of  his  times,  and  on  his  visit  to 
Italy,  1354,  met  the  poet.  Petrarch,  who  applauded  Charles 
as  the  Augustus  and  patron  of  learning,  looked  to  him  for  the 
liberation  of  Italy.  He  paid  the  emperor  the  high  compli- 
ment of  saying:  "We  look  upon  you  as  an  Italian."  As  a 
commissioner  from  Milan,  1356,  he  visited  the  Bohemian  cap- 
ital, calling  it  the  extreme  limit  of  the  barbarians.  Charles 
invited  the  Italian  man  of  letters  to  make  the  city  his  home, 
and  Petrarch  was  about  to  accept  and  go  North  when  he  was 
stopped  by  wars  and  the  bad  roads. ^ 

Further  evidence  of  the  prominence  of  Bohemia  at  this 
time  is  furnished  in  the  History  of  Bohemia,  the  volume 
written  by  ^Eneas  Sylvius,  afterward  Pope  Pius  II.  This 
description,  written  with  elegant  literary  taste,  covers  the 
natural  features  and  resources  of  the  country  as  well  as  the 
origin  and  annals  of  the  people,  ^neas  dwells  upon  the 
architecture  of  the  stone  bridge  across  the  Moldau  and 
praises  Charles  as  a  builder,  the  patron  of  letters,  the  founder 
of  religious  establishments,  and  the  giver  of  peace.  He  also 
gives  a  valuable  characterization  of  Huss  and  the  Hussites, 
by  whose  madness,  he  declared,  the  name  of  Bohemia  was  as 
much  tarnished  as  it  had  been  illuminated  by  the  constancy 
of  brave  men.^ 

In  the  days  of  Huss,  as  ^neas  says,  Prague  was  divided 
into  three  parts.  The  oldest  portion,  known  as  the  Wyssehrad, 
was  built  around  a  castle,  the  ancient  Bohemian  acropolis, 
on  the  right  bank  of  the  Moldau.  It  was  also  the  site  of  an 
extensive  monastery.  The  castle  was  destroyed  in  the  Hussite 
wars.  The  old  town  was  close  down  on  the  river's  bank  and 
included  the  buildings  of  the  university,  the  churches  of  St. 
Michael's  and  St.  Gallus,  and  the  famous  Teyn  church,  which 

^  J.  H.  Robertson,  Petrarch,  the  First  Modern  Scholar  and  Man  of  Letters, 
N.  Y.,  1899,  devotes  a  chapter,  pp.  329-377,  to  the  relation  between  Charles 
and  Petrarch. 

2  Introd.,  Sicut  Hiissitarum  insania  Bohemicum  nomen  labcfactavii  ita  el 
fortlum  virorum  constantia  illustravit. 


26  JOHN  HUSS 

was  the  church  of  the  Utraquist  wing  of  the  Hussites  until 
162 1,  and  is  still  one  of  the  memorable  monuments  of  the  city. 
Here  is  the  famous  old  town  square,  with  the  old  town  hall,  -^ 
built  1381,  a  portion  of  which  still  remains.  In  one  of  the 
council-chambers  hang  pictures  representing  John  Huss  be- 
fore the  council  of  Constance  and  the  election  of  John  Podie- 
brad  as  king,  March,  1458.  In  this  part  of  the  city  are  situ- 
ated the  old  Jewish  cemetery  and  synagogue,  among  the  very 
oldest  on  European  soil,  and  the  university  buildings.^ 

On  the  left  bank  of  the  Moldau,  is  the  Hradcany  con- 
taining the  palace  of  Charles  IV  and  buildings  erected  by 
the  Hapsburg  kings,  as  well  as  the  historic  palaces  of  the 
Wallenstein  and  the  Schwartzenberg  princes.  Here,  also,  is 
the  great  cathedral  of  St.  Vite,  begun  in  1344,  and  containing 
the  relics  of  St.  Wenceslaus  and  St.  John  Nepomuk.  In  the 
construction  of  the  latter's  shrine  three  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred pounds  of  silver  were  used. 

The  Bethlehem  chapel,  which  was  In  the  busy  and  con- 
gested old  town,  is  as  closely  associated  with  Huss  as  the 
Anastasia — the  church  of  the  Resurrection — at  Constanti- 
nople was  associated  with  Gregory  Nazianzen,  who  preached 
within  its  walls  his  famous  discourses  on  the  Trinity.  Both 
buildings  have  been  completely  destroyed,  the  chapel  in 
Prague  by  the  Jesuits  in  1786.  It  was  founded  in  1391  as  a 
place  for  preaching  in  the  Czech  language.  The  founders 
were  two  laymen,  the  merchant  Kriz,  who  gave  the  site,  and 
the  nobleman  John  Miihlheim  of  Pardubicz,  one  of  King 
Wenzel's  counsellors,  who  erected  the  building  and  endowed 
it.  It  was  called  Bethlehem — House  of  Bread — "because  the 
•  common  people  and  the  faithful  of  Christ  might  there  be  - 
refreshed  through  preaching."  In  his  letter  giving  his  apos- 
toUc  benediction  to  the  chapel,  1408,  Gregory  XII  repeated 

^  /Eneas,  who  speaks  of  the  old  town  as  magnificis  operibus  ornata,  reports 
one  of  the  outbreaks  against  the  Jews  in  which  one  thousand  were  slain  with- 
out regard  to  age  or  sex,  chap.  s:^. 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   27 

that  it  was  founded  for  the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God — 
pro  usu  predicationis  Verbi  Dei}  Provision  was  made  that 
two  sermons  should  be  delivered  every  Sabbath  and  festival 
day,  except  during  the  Advent  and  Lenten  seasons,  when  the 
number  was  reduced  to  one.  The  chapel  was  not  the  centre 
of  a  distinct  parish  but  was  within  the  bounds  of  the  parish 
of  St.  Philip  and  St.  James,  and  its  incumbent  had  no  inde- 
pendent jurisdiction  over  a  district,  although  he  celebrated 
the  mass  and  performed  other  church  offices.  The  right  of 
appointment  inhered  in  the  Miilheim  family.  Later,  pro- 
vision was  made  for  an  associate  preacher,  and  a  house  was 
built  for  the  priest  adjoining  the  chapel.  It  was  stipulated 
that  the  offerings  should  be  applied  to  the  maintenance  of 
poor  students  at  the  university. 

The  first  preacher  at  Bethlehem,  John  Protiva,  was  fol- 
lowed, in  1396,  by  Stephen  of  Kolin,  a  member  also  of  the 
university  faculty.  With  the  latter  was  associated  John  of 
Stiekna,  a  noted  preacher.  At  the  time  of  Huss's  appoint- 
ment Nicholas  Zeiselmeister  was  the  parish  priest,  a  man 
whom  Huss  first  accounted  a  friend  and  then  a  foe.^ 

From  the  time  Huss  entered  upon  his  duties,  March  14, 
1402,  the  Bethlehem  pulpit  was  the  chief  centre  of  religious 
attraction  in  Prague.  ^Eneas  pronounced  Huss  "a  powerful 
speaker."  His  power  of  eloquence,  however,  could  not  ac- 
count for  the  lasting  impression  he  made  on  the  religious  con- 
viction of  his  generation  and  his  becoming  the  chief  prophet  of 
his  people.  No  preacher  was  ever  more  attached  to  his  pulpit 
than  Huss  was  to  his  chapel.  In  the  dark  hours  of  his  im- 
prisonment he  recalled  it  with  warm  affection,  and  its  services 
even  occupied  his  dreams.  Among  his  last  messages  were 
letters  addressed  to  the  congregation  accustomed  to  worship 
within  its  walls.  The  dignity  of  the  preaching  function  Huss 
asserted  with  much  emphasis,  as  did  Wyclif  before  him, 
insisting,  as  in  his  Treatise  on  Ike  Church,  upon  the  priest's 

*  Doc,  340  sq.,  394.     Mon.,  i  :  115.  •  Sermones  de  Sanctis,  p.  iii. 


28  JOHN  HUSS 

right  to  preach  as  being  conferred  on  him  in  his  ordination, 
and  to  be  taken  away  from  him  by  an  ecclesiastical  superior 
only  when  the  preacher  subverted  his  office  by  advocating 
opinions  evidently  injurious  or  heretical.  Although  the  chapel 
was  devoted  to  preaching  through  the  medium  of  the  Czech 
language,  the  most  of  Huss's  extant  sermons  are  not  in 
Czech,  the  explanation  of  which  is  that  the  outlines  were 
prepared  in  Latin  and  the  discourses  freely  deUvered  in  the 
native  tongue. 

Popular  preaching,  as  has  been  said,  was  no  new  thing  in 
Prague.  For  half  a  century  before  Huss's  appearance 
preachers  had  stirred  the  city  by  sermons  in  German  and 
Czech.  The  most  notable  of  Huss's  forerunners  in  the  Bo- 
hemian pulpit  were  Konrad  of  Waldhausen,  Milicz  of  Kremsier 
and  Matthias  of  Janow.'^  Konrad  of  Waldhausen,  an  Aus- 
trian belonging  to  the  Augustinian  order,  settled  in  Prague 
at  the  invitation  of  Charles  IV,  1360.  Here  he  preached 
until  his  death,  in  1369,  first  in  St.  Callus  church  and  then 
in  the  Teyn.  His  sermons  were  a  popular  sensation.  They 
soon  emptied  the  churches  of  the  Mendicant  orders.  Of  the 
discourses  of  the  Mendicants  he  used  the  following  words: 
"As  soon  as  I  came  to  Prague  the  mass  of  the  people  forsook 
the  churches  of  the  friar  preachers  with  their  fawning  dis- 
courses—blandis  sermonibus—sind  have  followed  me  to  this 
day,  and  that  in  spite  of  the  vigor  with  which  I  have  rebuked 
and  punished  them. "  On  one  occasion  when  he  was  preaching 
at  Saaz,  in  1365,  Franciscans  sought  to  drown  the  preacher's 
voice  and  break  up  the  services  by  ringing  the  bell,  but 
Konrad  dismissed  the  congregation  from  the  church  and 
preached  in  the  open  air.  So  great  were  the  throngs  which 
pressed  to  hear  him  that  he  was  at  times  obliged  to  leave  the 
Teyn  church  and  set  up  his  pulpit  in  front  of  it  on  the  public 
square.     He  preached  both  in  German  and  in  Latin. 

'  For  these  preachers  and  others,  see  Palacky,  Vorlditfer  des  Hiissitenthums 
in  Bokmen  and  Gesch.  Bohmens,  III,  i  :  158  sqq.  Also  Loserth,  Wiclif  and 
Hits,  38  sqq.,  301  sqq.,  and  Flajshans,  Introd.  to  the  Sermones  de  Sanctis. 


HUSS  AND   THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL        29 

Waldhauser,  as  he  was  also  called,  was  a  preacher  of  re- 
pentance and  righteousness,  and  attacked  spiritual  pride, 
avarice,  luxury,  usury,  and  other  sins.  The  effect  of  his 
sermons  was  shown  in  changed  lives.  Women,  it  is  reported, 
laid  aside  their  jewelry  and  their  rich  garments,  influenced  by 
his  warnings.  The  more  he  condemned  vice  and  unnecessary 
adornment  the  more,  he  said,  did  the  attachment  to  him  grow. 
Konrad  also  used,  as  he  himself  informs  us,  the  sharp  thorn 
of  the  Word  against  the  simony  of  the  clergy,  and  especially 
of  the  monks,  and  arraigned  them  for  commending  spurious 
relics.  "It  is  folly,"  he  exclaimed,  "to  run  after  the  head  of 
St.  Barbara  when  it  is  found  not  in  Prague  but  in  Prussia."^ 
To  the  complaints  he  made  against  the  monks,  the  arch- 
bishop replied  that  they  were  outside  his  jurisdiction  and 
had  their  own  superiors  to  whom  they  were  amenable. 

Irritated  by  Konrad's  censures  and  popularity,  the  Do- 
minicans formulated  against  him  eighteen  charges,  to  which 
the  Augustinians  added  six  more.  Four  of  them  ran  as 
follows:  Those  who  receive  boys  or  girls  into  convents  for 
money  are  eternally  damned.  No  one  in  Prague  preaches  the 
whole  truth.  Monks  are  fat  with  goods  and  need  no  money. 
Members  of  orders  had  been  commissioned  to  kill  him. 

In  reply  the  preacher  publicly  declared  that  the  friars  were 
so  little  like  the  first  members  of  their  orders  that  they  would 
not  only  be  disowned  by  them  but  be  stoned.  In  this  also 
they  had  changed.  In  the  early  days  they  had  been  in  con- 
stant rivalry  and  strife;  now  they  were  united  in  the  effort  to 
break  down  his  usefulness  and  the  influence  of  the  Word  of 
God.  A  contemporary,  Adalbert  Ranconis,  eulogized  Kon- 
rad "as  a  defender  of  Christ's  truth,  an  example  of  religion 
and  sobriety,  the  mirror  of  virtue,  and  preacher  of  the  Gospel." 

*  St.  Barbara,  a  martyr,  is  said  to  have  been  a  beautiful  maiden  whom  her 
heathen  father  gave  over  to  the  authorities  and  whom  they  punished  with 
torture  and  burning.  Her  legend  is  very  uncertain  both  as  to  place  and  the 
time  of  her  death.  She  is  the  patron  saint  of  the  artillery  and  was  invoked 
against  the  ravages  of  tempest  and  fire. 


30  JOHN  HUSS 

At  Konrad's  death  a  preacher  of  equal  or  greater  fame 
was  made  his  successor  in  the  Teyn  church,  Mihcz,  of  Kremsier, 
a  town  in  Moravia.^  For  five  years,  until  his  death  in  1374, 
he  carried  on  Konrad's  work.  In  1363  he  suddenly  gave  up 
positions  of  honor  and  emolument  in  the  imperial  chancery 
and  as  canon  of  St.  Vite  and  archdeacon  of  Prague  to  devote 
himself  to  poverty  and  preaching.  After  serving  for  a  few 
months  in  the  parish  of  Bishop  Teinitz,  he  returned  to 
Prague  and  preached  successively  in  the  churches  of  St. 
Nicholas  and  St.  ^gidius  before  being  transferred  to  the 
church  of  Teyn.  Here  his  popularity  was  so  great  that,  on 
occasion,  he  was  forced  to  preach  three  times  a  day.  Yea, 
we  know  of  his  preaching  five  sermons  on  a  single  day,  once 
in  Latin,  once  in  German,  and  three  times  in  Bohemian. 
The  last  was  his  vernacular  and,  by  using  it,  he  strengthened 
the  national  feeling  of  the  Czechs.  Milicz's  indictments 
against  vice  and  corruption  were  directed  against  all  classes, 
lay  and  cleric,  even  to  the  hierarchy.  So  effective  were  his 
appeals  that  the  part  of  the  city  known  for  its  houses  of  ill 
fame  as  Venice — Benatky,  that  is  dedicated  to  Venus — un- 
derwent such  a  transformation  that  it  came  to  be  known  as 
New  Jerusalem.  Scores  of  fallen  women — Janow  reported  two 
hundred — did  penance  and  renounced  their  former  mode  of 
life.  New  buildings  were  erected  in  the  neighborhood  under 
the  patronage  of  Charles  IV,  where  penitents  were  housed  and 
a  semi-monastic  community  maintained. 

Milicz's  mind  became  fired  with  the  prophecies  of  anti- 
christ and  the  last  days,  and  he  dwelt  frequently,  as  later  did 
Huss,  on  "the  abomination  of  desolation  which  was  spoken 
of  through  Daniel  the  prophet  standing  in  the  holy  place," 
Matt.  24  :  15.  He  announced  the  coming  of  antichrist  in 
the  period  1363-1367,  wrote  a  special  treatise  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  explained  as  of  antichrist  every  thought  and  act 

*  "Noch  grosseren  Namen  und  Ruhm  ah  Konrad  erwarb  sich  Milicz  und  hatte 
dafiir  auch  noch  viel  grbssere  Anfechtungen  zii  ertragen  als  sein  Vor ganger,  Kon- 
rad."— Palacky,  Vorlaufer,  p.  18. 


HUSS   AND   THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL        31 

contrary  to  love  and  humility.  Before  a  large  assembly,  as 
it  appears,  he  arraigned  Charles  IV  himself  as  antichrist. 
For  this  he  suffered  imprisonment  at  the  hands  of  the  arch- 
bishop of  Prague.  Attacked  by  the  clergy,  he  appealed  to  the 
pope.  In  1367  he  visited  Rome,  where  he  waited  in  expecta- 
tion of  Urban  V's  return  from  Avignon.  He  posted  on  St. 
Peter's  a  notice  of  his  purpose  to  preach  on  the  subject  of 
the  near  approach  of  antichrist.  This  brought  upon  him 
the  hand  of  the  inquisition,  which  seized  and  imprisoned  him. 
Set  at  liberty,  he  gained  the  ear  of  the  cardinal  of  Albano, 
who  had  accompanied  Urban  on  his  brief  visit  to  Rome.  He 
returned  to  Prague,  where,  stung  by  his  attacks,  the  monks 
drew  up  twelve  articles  against  him,  which  they  forwarded  to 
the  papal  court  at  Avignon.  According  to  Matthias  of  Janow, 
who  left  a  detailed  eulogy  of  Milicz,  no  one  not  moved  by  the 
spirit  of  antichrist  could  be  in  his  presence  without  breath- 
ing in  love,  grace,  and  sweetness,  and  no  one  could  hear  him 
without  being  edified.  Among  the  charges  brought  in  the 
articles  were  these:  antichrist  had  already  come,  clerics  had 
no  right  to  hold  personal  property,  taxes  collected  by  priests 
on  houses  and  vineyards  are  usury,  and  frequent  communion 
should  be  practised.  He  asserted  that,  if  a  priest  might  cele- 
brate three  times  a  day,  so  the  people  might  communicate 
three  times  a  day.^  Gregory  XI  condemned  the  articles  and 
ordered  Milicz  to  desist  from  pubhc  ministrations,  "pro- 
vided the  facts  were  such  as  we  are  informed  they  are."  The 
accused  preacher  set  his  face  toward  Avignon,  where  he  was 
again  befriended  by  the  cardinal  of  Albano  and  preached  be- 
fore the  cardinals.  He  died  June  29,  1374.  Matthias  of 
Janow,  who  praised  his  devotion  to  the  poor  and  outcast  in 
the  fervor  of  his  preaching,  calls  Milicz  a  son  and  copy  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  almost  the  likeness  of  the  Apostles  in 
word  and  deed. 

If  possible,  a  more  popular  exponent  of  the  Gospel  than 
'  Palacky,  Vorlaufer,  39-46,  for  the  twelve  articles  in  Latin  and  Czech. 


32  JOHN  HUSS 

Konrad  and  Milicz  was  Matthias  of  Janow.  The  son  of  a 
Bohemian  knight,  he  studied  six  years  in  Paris,  so  that  he  was 
known  in  Bohemia  as  the  Parisian  master.  He  spent  some 
time  in  Rome  and  on  his  return  to  Prague  was  appointed  to  a 
canon's  stall  in  St.  Vite's  and  to  the  position  of  confessor  there. 
At  his  death,  1394,  he  was  buried  in  the  cathedral.  Janow 
exercised  his  influence  as  effectively  outside  the  pulpit  as  in 
it.  In  a  volume  entitled  The  Rules  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament — De  regulis  veteris  et  novi  testamenti — he  applied 
the  precepts  of  Christianity  to  the  conditions  of  his  age.^ 
His  observations,  based  on  the  study  of  the  Bible,  were  given 
to  him,  as  he  asserted,  in  answer  to  prayer.  The  Bible  he 
emphasized  as  the  sufficient  text-book  of  religious  conduct, 
and  the  twelve  fundamental  articles  he  drew  from  it  con- 
cerned the  imitation  of  Christ  in  daily  life  rather  than  ec- 
clesiastical dogmas  drawn  from  the  Fathers.  On  every  page 
the  author  shows  his  interest  in  the  religious  welfare  of  the 
laity. 

His  own  religious  awakening  Janow  compared  to  a  re- 
ligious fire  which  had  entered  his  heart,  and  whose  flames 
burned  brighter  as  he  lifted  up  his  soul  in  prayer  to  God 
and  to  Jesus  Christ,  the  crucified.  The  Bible  had  been  his 
friend  and  bride  from  his  youth  up.  It  was  to  him  the  mother 
of  love  and  knowledge.  "I  have  used  in  my  writings,"  he 
says,  "the  Bible  above  all  else  and  in  less  degree  the  sayings 
of  the  doctors,  because  the  Scriptures  occur  to  me  quickly 
and  copiously  and  because  the  most  divine  truths  are  there 
set  forth  most  lucidly  and  self-evidently.  ...  I  have  always 
found  in  and  through  them  satisfactory  explanations  for  every 
question  and  consolation  for  my  soul  in  all  my  persecutions, 
trouble,  and  sadness.     I  always  flee  for  refuge  to  the  Bible, 

1  Palacky,  Vorldufer,  58-80,  gives  excerpts.  Neander,  Cli.  Hist.,  Engl,  trs., 
5  :  191-235,  gives  large  space  to  Matthias  and  advocates  the  view  first  pre- 
sented in  a  paper  read  before  the  Academy  of  Sciences,  Berlin,  1847,  that  Huss 
was  strongly  influenced  by  Matthias  independently  of  Wyclif.  This  view 
has  been  made  impossible  by  later  studies. 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   ^^ 

which  is  my  dearest  friend."  He  chose  it  as  his  companion 
even  on  his  travels,  while  others  took  with  them  relics.  He 
contrasted  the  mandatory  arrogance  of  papal  bulls  with  the 
invitations  of  the  Gospel.  His  teaching  which  gave  the  most 
offense  was  the  recommendation  of  frequent  communion  for 
the  laity.  He  deplored  the  idea  that  a  communion  once  a 
year  was  sufficient  for  the  soul.  Even  as  the  eye  needs  the 
sun  constantly,  so  does  the  soul  need  the  bread  of  the  altar. 

These  views  brought  him  into  conflict  with  the  church 
authorities.  Synodal  decrees  forbade  the  communion  to  the 
laity  oftener  than  once  a  month  and  enjoined  laymen  to  ad- 
dress prayers  to  images.  In  1389,  Janow  signed  a  formula  of 
retraction,  and  in  five  articles  affirmed  his  belief  as  follows: 
I.  That  sacred  images  are  no  cause  of  idolatry.  2.  That 
images  should  be  adored.  3.  That  relics,  including  the 
bones  of  saints  and  the  garments  of  Christ  and  the  Virgin 
Mary,  are  to  be  worshipped,  and  the  saints  in  glory  profit  us 
more  than  the  living  on  earth.  4.  That,  by  partaking  of  the 
bread  of  the  altar,  we  are  made  mystical  members  of  Christ. 
5.  That  the  laity  is  to  be  exhorted  to  take  the  communion 
daily. ^  As  a  punishment  for  propagating  these  errors  Janow 
was  inhibited  for  half  a  year  from  preaching  and  performing 
priestly  functions  outside  his  own  parish. 

These  three  preachers  and  reformers  prepared  the  minds 
of  low  and  high  for  the  messages  of  Huss.  They  preceded  him 
in  emphasizing  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  though  in  this 
respect  they  di3rnot  go  to  the  lengtlT  that  he  went,  and  in 
publicly  rebuking  the  worldliness  of  the  clergy.  Without 
doubt,  Huss  was  influenced  by  their  example,  but  for  his 
guiding  principles  he  did  not  look  to  them.  For  these  he 
leaned  not  upon  a  Bohemian  but  upon  John  Wyclif. 

'  The  text  in  Doc,  699  sqq.  According  to  Rokyzan's  statement  at  the  coun- 
cil of  Basel,  1433,  Janow  also  recommended  the  giving  of  the  cup  to  the 
laity,  a  recommendation  from  which  he  promised  to  desist.  It  is  probable 
he  never  held  this  view.  Through  Jacobellus  of  Mies  and  others,  Janow  exerted 
an  influence  upon  the  Hussites. 


34  JOHN  HUSS 

Other  preachers  combined  to  give  lustre  to  the  Prague 
pulpit  and  preached  in  the  Slavic  at  the  time  of  Huss's  studies 
in  the  university  and  later.  Among  them  were  John  of 
Stiekna,  d.  1405,  whom  Huss  called  "the  excellent  preacher 
with  a  voice  like  a  trumpet,"  Peter  of  Stupna  and  Stephen  of 
Kolin.  Indeed,  Prague  was  the  metropolis  of  popular  preach- 
ing in  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth  and  the  beginning  of 
the  fifteenth  centuries.  And  in  this  respect  we  cannot  help 
but  compare  and  contrast  Bohemia  with  England  before  the 
Reformation  as  depicted  by  Hugh  Latimer.  In  his  sermon 
preached  before  Edward  VI,  March  22,  1549,  he  said:  "If 
there  was  ever  a  man  that  preached  in  England  in  times  past, 
in  the  pope's  times,  as  peradventure  there  were  two  or  three, 
straightway  he  was  taken  and  nipped  in  the  bud  with  the  title 
of  a  heretic." 

The  use  of  the  Czech  as  a  vehicle  for  religious  thought  and 
literary  effort  was  greatly  advanced  by  Thomas  Stitny,  a 
classical  Bohemian  author  who  died  about  1400  and  used  the 
native  tongue  not  only  in  devotional  works  but  for  learned 
discussions.  His  style  is  said  to  be  a  model  to  this  day.  The 
use  of  the  Czech  in  the  pulpit  and  on  the  written  page  strength- 
ened the  national  spirit.  With  this  movement  Huss  was 
in  full  sympathy,  and  these  sympathies  with  the  Czech  in- 
stitutions combined  with  his  high  aims  and  eloquence  to  give 
him  the  position  of  a  leader  of  his  people.  And,  to  say  the 
least,  none  of  his  predecessors  in  the  pulpit  and  none  of  his 
contemporaries  excelled  him  in  these  respects. 

At  least  nine  collections  of  Huss's  sermons  in  Latin  are 
extant,  in  addition  to  his  Bohemian  sermons.^  The  Scrip- 
tural element  abounds.     Huss's  exposition  is  clear  and  the 

1  See  the  list  in  Flajshans,  De  Sanctis,  Introd.,  pp.  iv-vi,  and  the  sermons 
printed  in  the  Mon.  II,  where  nine  sermons  are  designated  as  S3Tiodal  ser- 
mons, pp.  35-84,  and  twenty-eight  as  preached  against  antichrist.  Flajshans 
calls  in  question  the  genuineness  of  parts  of  these  sermons  or  sermons  as  a 
whole,  without,  however,  going  into  particulars.  His  collection,  De  Sanctis, 
was  discovered  in  1897  in  a  Ms.  in  the  library  of  Prague. 


HUSS  AND   THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL       35 

message  applied  with  directness  and  simplicity.  There  is 
nothing  in  them  the  wayfaring  man  cannot  understand.  The 
doctrinal  element  is  not  missing,  but  chief  stress  is  laid  upon  Y 

moral  conduct  and  edification.  We  miss  in  them  the  illus- 
trative element  which  makes  Luther's  sermons  so  real  and 
vivid.  The  needs  and  rights  of  the  lay-folk  are  always  in 
Huss's  mind  and  he  has  no  mercy  on  the  faithless  priest  who 
offends  against  his  vow  of  chastity,  practises  simony,  or  with- 
holds spiritual  benefits  from  those  who  do  not  pay  him  money. 
After  the  period  of  his  struggle  with  the  ecclesiastical  author- 
ities of  Prague  had.  fairly  begun,  the  references  to  the  stages 
of  the  struggle  are  frequent  and  elaborate.  Long  quotations 
are  introduced  into  the  sermons  from  Augustine,  Gregory  the 
Great,  Bernard,  Thomas  Aquinas,  and  other  ecclesiastical 
writers. 

Looking  through  his  seventy-seven  sermons  on  the  church 
festivals,  we  find  discourses  on  Matthew,  John  the  Baptist, 
Mary  Magdalene,  Stephen,  and  other  characters  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  also  on  Bohemian  saints  such  as  Adalbert, 
St.  Ludmilla,  and  St.  Wenceslaus.  There  are  no  less  than 
twenty-five  sermons  on  the  Virgin  Mary  and  her  festivals. 
These  sermons,  preached  in  1403,  are  free  from  the  atmos- 
phere engendered  by  the  later  struggles  in  which  Huss  was 
engaged.  There  is  no  departure  from  the  usual  dogmatic 
teaching  of  the  church.  For  example,  the  assumption  oflj-^' 
Mary  is  accepted  as  well  as  the  annunciation  and  her  vir- 
ginity. Following  the  style  of  the  medieeval  theology,  he 
refers  to  her  passage  after  passage  of  the  Canticles.  She  is 
the  star  that  arose  out  of  Jacob  and  the  rod  out  of  Israel, 
Num.  24  :  17.  As  a  star  is  not  affected  by  foreign  impres- 
sions, so  she  was  without  corruption  in  the  conception  and 
birth  of  Christ  and  in  her  contact  with  the  world;  nor  was  there 
any  corporal  putrefaction  at  her  death.  She  is  "as  fair  as 
the  moon,  as  clear  as  the  sun,  terrible  as  an  army  with  ban- 
ners," Cant.  6  :  10.     She  trod  on  the  serpent's  head.    A  pas- 


36  JOHN  HUSS 

sage  to  which  Huss  returns  again  and  again  in  elaborating 
her  merits  is  Luke  lo  :  38,  "He  entered  into  a  certain  village" 
— castellum.  The  village  or  fortified  town  was  Mary,  into 
whom  Jesus  entered  when  the  Word  was  made  flesh.  Mary  is 
full  of  pity  and  most  gracious,  who  stands  in  God's  presence 
making  intercession  for  us  poor  sinners  and  especially  for 
those  who  seriously  seek  her  aid.  She  is  to  be  imitated  in 
her  humility  as  against  the  devil,  in  her  poverty  as  against 
the  lusts  of  the  world,  and  in  her  chastity  as  against  the  temp- 
tations of  the  flesh.  As  for  her  assumption,  Huss  told  his 
hearers  that  the  angels  looked  on  with  the  same  wonder  with 
which  they  looked  on  at  the  ascension  of  Christ.  It  is  a  matter 
of  uncertainty  whether  Mary  ascended  in  soul  only  or  en- 
veloped with  her  body.  Upon  the  whole,  the  argument  seems 
to  be  that  she  ascended  with  her  body  as  did  Moses. 

At  this  early  period  Huss  took  the  ground  he  afterward 
assumed  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church,  that  not  Peter,  but 
Christ,  is  the  rock  on  which  the  church  is  built.  In  favor  of 
this  interpretation,  he  quoted  the  famous  passage  from  Augus- 
tine's Retractations  and  confirmed  it  from  I  Cor.  3.  "Other 
foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Christ 
Jesus."  ^  He  refers  to  the  abuse  of  the  power  of  the  keys  and 
claims  for  all  the  Apostles  equally  the  right  of  loosing  and 
binding.  In  these  sermons  the  church  is  defined  as  the  whole 
number  of  the  elect— /o/w5  numerus  predestinatorum. 

At  the  meetings  of  the  synod  of  Prague,  before  which  he 
was  appointed  several  times  to  deliver  the  opening  sermon, 
as  well  as  in  the  Bethlehem  pulpit,  Huss  seemed  to  have  been 
without  fear  in  denouncing  the  vices  of  the  clergy  and  the 
hierarchy  and  their  indifference  to  the  spiritual  needs  of  the 
people.  HireHng  ministers  called  forth  his  scathing  rebuke. 
Preaching  from  John  10  :  12-16,  he  said:  "Such  a  minister 
is  known  from  three  things.  He  does  not  concern  himself  for 
his  ofiice  as  a  shepherd;  he  flees  when  persecution  arises;  he 

'  De  Sanctis,  80-84. 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   37 

seeks  after  hire  rather  than  to  follow  Christ's  commands. 
He  invents  all  sorts  of  precepts  and  rules  in  order  to  plunder 
the  people.  Such  ininisters  speak  evil  in  high  places,  call- 
ing out  that  all  who  disobey  them  are  heretics  and  that  they 
have  the  power  to  condemn  to  hell.  Yea,  they  claim  power 
to  control  heaven  with  their  tongues,  preaching  that  they 
have  authority  to  open  it  to  whom  they  will  and  to  release 
from  pain  those  who  pay  money.  They  open  the  door  of 
heaven  to  persons  immediately  upon  their  death.  These 
hireling  priests  are  wolves  preying  upon  the  flock  and  are  of 
antichrist,  the  great  wolf,  Jer.  5:6.  They  are  now  so  many 
in  number  and  so  influential  that  they  seize  faithful  shepherds 
who  feed  their  flocks  on  the  pastures  of  God's  Word,  and  put 
them  to  death  as  heretics." 

The  following  excerpts  from  his  sermons  will  sufl&ciently 
illustrate  his  homiletical  method.  Preaching  on  Christ's 
words,  "Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  busi- 
ness?" Huss  said:  "This  means  that,  first  of  all  and  chiefly,  I 
be  engaged  in  that  which  concerns  my  Father  and  not  in  the 
service  of  any  creature  whatsoever.  And  why  did  Christ  give 
this  answer  ?  Because  he  came  into  the  world  for  the  purpose 
of  bearing  witness  to  the  truth.  And  let  this  be  an  admoni- 
tion to  fathers  and  mothers  that  they  put  no  stumbling-block 
in  the  way  of  their  children  serving  God.  If  children  follow 
their  own  wills,  parents  should  at  once  seek  after  the  cause  of 
their  doing  so  and  study  how  they  may  properly  admonish 
their  children  and  set  them  in  the  right  path.  And  children 
should  take  their  lessons  from  the  conduct  of  Jesus,  not  to 
withstand  their  parents  and  be  angry  against  them.  For 
Jesus  spoke  in  humble  tone  when  he  asked  his  father  and 
mother,  'Why  do  ye  seek  me?'  So  every  man,  and  especially 
prelates,  should  take  Jesus'  treatment  of  his  parents  as  an 
example  that  they  may  first  of  all  seek  the  profit  of  the  church 
and  have  respect  to  God  more  than  to  any  mortal  man. 
For  Jesus,  setting  aside  the  will  of  his  earthly  father  and 


J 


38  JOHN  HUSS 

mother  and  doing  the  will  of  God,  has  taught  us  that  every 
man  should  do  the  will  of  God,  when  he  perceives  that  what 
God  requires  is  something  else  than  what  our  parents  wish. 
Mary  and  Joseph  did  not  want  Jesus  to  remain  in  the  temple 
but  God  wanted  him  to  remain.  Therefore,  Jesus  said  to 
his  father  and  mother  that  it  behooved  him  to  remain  in  the 
temple  to  instruct  the  doctors  as  the  Father  had  commanded. 
Against  this  instruction  priests  very  frequently  offend  who 
esteem  men's  precepts  more  highly  than  God's  commands  and 
obey  man  rather  than  God.  And  priests  lead  men  to  a  false 
and  sinful  obedience,  for  many  of  them  preach  that  the  peo- 
ple should  hearken  to  all  the  pope  commands  and  obey  him, 
inasmuch  as  the  pope  cannot  err.  They  do  not  seem  to  know 
that  many  popes  have  been  heretics.  Other  priests  preach 
that  laymen  should  yield  obedience  even  when  a  bishop  or  a 
pope  commands  something  that  is  evil,  for  in  obeying  they 
commit  no  sin  and  only  he  commits  sin  who  issues  the  evil 
command.  That  is  the  devil's  yoke,  for  the  devil  seeks  to 
lead  men  into  evil  and  does  not  concern  himself  upon  whom 
the  guilt  of  sin  rests.  Neither  the  one  who  commands  nor 
X  the  one  who  obeys  is  without  sin,  as  said  the  Saviour,  Matt. 
15  :  14:  'When  a  blind  man  leads  the  blind  both  fall  into 
the  ditch.'  Here  the  Saviour  was  speaking  of  those  prelates 
who,  like  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  lead  the  people  by  their 
precepts  to  transgress  the  commands  of  God." 

In  a  sermon  on  Matt.  13  :  24-30  concerning  the  tares 
which  were  not  to  be  pulled  up  lest  the  wheat  also  be  pulled 
up  with  them,  the  interesting  line  of  remark  is  followed  that 
the  tares  are  also  in  a  certain  degree  useful  to  the  wheat. 
They  protect  the  wheat  against  the  wind  so  that  it  can  stand 
upright.  At  first  it  is  not  possible  to  distinguish  the  two  and, 
in  pulling  up  the  tares,  the  wheat  is  apt  to  be  trodden  under 
foot  or  its  growth  in  a  measure  hindered.  In  like  manner 
bad  men,  if  they  are  sparsely  scattered  amongst  the  good,  are 
helpful  to  the  good  unto  their  lasting  salvation,  for  they  help 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM  CHAPEL   39 

to  confirm  them  in  the  power  to  resist  evil  and  stand  in  the 
spiritual  conflict.  If  there  were  no  bad  people  there  would 
be  no  temptations  and,  in  consequence,  no  spiritual  contest 
and  reward.  The  destruction  of  all  bad  people  in  this  world 
would  inure  to  the  hurt  of  the  good.  Sometimes,  however, 
it  is  well  that  worldly  princes  pluck  up  the  tares.  But  this 
they  must  do  in  accordance  with  the  Word  of  God  and  they 
dare  not  follow  human  ordinances.  It  is  fitting  that  they 
first  seriously  reflect  upon  what  they  propose  to  do  and  get 
advice  from  men  expert  in  God's  Word  and  use  grace  and 
prudence  rather  than  severity  so  as  to  avoid  doing  hurt  to  the 
wheat  or  perchance  pluck  it  up.  Christ  commanded  Peter  to 
avoid  as  a  publican  and  heathen  a  person  offending  against 
him,  provided  the  offender's  sin  was  evident  and  the  offender 
refused  to  hear  holy  church  and  to  follow  its  counsel.  But 
he  did  not  command  him  to  subject  the  offender  to  torture 
and  death. 

In  the  same  sermon,  defining  the  kingdom  of  God,  Huss 
found  the  following  meanings  in  the  Scripture:  "  i.  It  is  the 
communion  of  saints  in  heaven,  as  when  we  pray  '  Thy  king- 
dom come.'  2.  Christ  himself,  as  when  it  is  said  'The  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  within  you.'  3.  The  church  in  this  world 
or  the  communion  of  all  Christians,  of  which  Christ  speaks, 
Matt.  3  :  41,  as  when  he  says:  'He  will  send  forth  his  angels 
and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all  that  offend.' 
4.  The  dwelHng-place  of  the  elect  in  heaven,  Matt.  20  :  20, 
'Grant  that  these  my  two  sons  may  sit,  the  one  on  thy  right 
hand  and  the  other  on  thy  left  in  thy  kingdom.'  5.  The 
Scriptures,  Matt.  21  :  43,  'The  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken 
from  you  and  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits 
thereof,'  that  is,  the  Scriptures  will  be  taken  from  you  and 
given  to  Christians  who  wiU  use  them  to  profit.  Here  belongs 
also  Matt.  23  :  13,  where  Christ  said  of  the  scribes  and  Phar- 
isees, that  'they  shut  up  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  men.' 
This  they  do  by  keeping  back  the  Scriptures  from  the  people 


40  JOHN  HUSS 

so  that  they  may  not  read  or  understand  them,  and  know  how 
men  ought  to  live;  that  they  may  not  know  how  to  punish 
the  priests  for  their  sins,  or  through  knowledge  of  the  Scrip- 
tures may  not  insist  that  the  priests  become  better  instructed 
in  them.  And  again  the  priests  keep  the  knowledge  of  the 
Scriptures  from  the  people  because  the  priests  fear  they  will 
not  receive  the  same  amount  of  honor  if  the  people  are  taught 
to  read  the  Bible." 

The  following  is  a  Christmas  meditation  Huss  wrote  to  his 
congregation  of  Bethlehem  chapel  during  the  period  of  his 
semi-voluntary  exile  from  Prague,  December  25,  1412: 

Dearest  friends:  To-day,  as  it  were,  an  angel  is  saying  to  the 
shepherds:  "I  bring  you  good  tidings  of  great  joy  that  shall  be  to 
all  people."  And  suddenly  a  multitude  of  the  angels  exclaim, 
saying:  "  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest  and  on  earth  peace  to  men  of 
good-will."  As  you  commemorate  these  things,  dearest  friends, 
rejoice  that  to-day  God  is  born  a  man,  that  there  may  be  glory  to 
God  in  the  highest  and  on  earth  peace  to  men  of  good- will.  Re- 
joice that  to-day  the  infinitely  Great  One  is  born  a  child,  that  there 
may  be  glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  etc.  Rejoice  that  to-day  a 
Reconciler  is  born  to  reconcile  man  to  God,  that  there  may  be  glory 
to  God  in  the  highest,  etc.  Rejoice  that  to-day  He  is  born  to 
cleanse  sinners  from  their  sin,  to  deliver  them  from  the  devil's 
power,  to  lead  them  from  eternal  perdition,  to  bring  them  to  eter- 
nal joy,  that  there  may  be  glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  etc. 
Rejoice  with  great  joy  that  to-day  is  born  unto  us  a  King,  to  be- 
stow in  its  fulness  upon  us  the  heavenly  kingdom,  a  Bishop  to 
grant  His  eternal  benediction,  a  Father  of  the  ages  to  come,  to 
keep  us  as  His  children  by  His  side  forever:  yea,  ther«  is  born  a 
Brother  beloved,  a  wise  Master,  a  sure  Leader,  a  just  Judge,  to 
the  end  that  there  may  be  glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  etc.  Re- 
joice, ye  wicked,  that  God  is  born  as  a  Priest,  who  hath  granted 
to  every  penitent  absolution  from  all  sins,  that  there  may  be 
glory,  etc.  Rejoice  that  to-day  the  Bread  of  Angels — that  is,  God, 
is  made  the  Bread  of  men,  to  revive  the  hungry  with  His  body,  that 
there  may  be  peace  among  them,  and  on  earth,  etc.  Rejoice  that 
God  immortal  is  born,  that  mortal  man  may  live  forever.  Re- 
joice that  the  rich  Lord  of  the  universe  lies  in  a  manger,  hke  a 


HUSS  AND  THE  BETHLEHEM   CHAPEL       41 

poor  man,  that  He  may  make  us  needy  ones  rich.  Rejoice,  most 
dearly  beloved,  that  what  the  prophets  prophesied  has  been  ful- 
filled, that  there  may  be  glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  etc.  Rejoice 
that  there  is  born  to  us  a  Child  all  powerful  and  that  a  Son  is  given 
to  us  full  of  wisdom  and  grace,  that  there  may  be  glory  to  God  in 
the  highest,  etc.  Oh,  dearest  friends,  ought  there  to  be  only  a 
moderate  rejoicing  over  these  things?  Nay,  a  mighty  joy!  For 
indeed  the  angel  saith:  "I  bring  you  good  tidings  of  great  joy,"  for 
that  there  is  born  a  Redeemer  from  all  misery,  a  Saviour  from 
sin,  a  Governor  of  His  faithful  ones;  there  is  born  a  Comforter  for 
those  in  sorrow,  and  there  is  given  to  us  the  Son  of  God  that  we 
may  have  great  joy  and  that  there  may  be  glory  to  God  in  the 
highest  and  on  earth  peace  to  men  of  good-will.  May  it  please 
God  born  this  day  to  grant  to  us  His  good-will,  His  peace,  and 
withal,  His  joy. 

It  is  no  wonder  that  Bethlehem  chapel  was  thronged. 
Its  pulpit  dealt  in  no  theological  abstractions.  The  sword  of 
the  Spirit,  which  is  the  Word  of  God,  was  in  the  preacher's 
hand  a  sharp  weapon,  wielded  dexterously  to  lay  open  the 
sins  and  subterfuges  of  the  conscience.  It  was  the  Word  of 
Life  offering  the  comforts  of  saving  grace.  Huss  was  a  preaciici 
to  the  age  in  which  he  lived,  to  the  congregations  which  pressed 
to  hear  him.  His  messages  burn  with  zeal  for  pure  religion 
and  with  sympathy  for  men.  With  his  whole  heart  he  was  a 
preacher.  Christ's  chief  command,  as  he  reminded  the  arch- 
bishop of  Prague,  was  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature, 
and  when  he  was  forbidden  by  archbishop  and  pope  to  longer 
occupy  his  pulpit  he  solemnly  declared,  in  a  letter  to  the  chief 
civil  officials  of  Bohemia,  that  he  dared  not  obey  the  com- 
mands, for  to  do  so  would  be  to  offend  "against  God  and  his 
own  salvation."^  Preaching  was  the  priest's  primary  duty. 
Huss  followed  worthily  in  the  footsteps  of  his  great  pred- 
ecessors and  went  beyond  them  in  the  extent  of  his  influence 
and  in  the  novelty  of  his  message. 

The  following  judgment  is  passed  by  the  Bohemian  his- 

^  Doc,  4,  24. 


42  JOHN  HUSS 

torian  Palacky  upon  Huss  as  a  preacher/  which  is  given  un- 
abridged, although  we  dissent  from  the  last  words,  disparaging 
in  a  degree  Huss's  moral  purpose:  "His  sermons,  preached 
through  a  number  of  years,  belong  to  the  chief  events  of  his  age. 
Less  coarse  in  his  addresses  than  Konrad  of  Waldhausen,  less 
enthusiastic  in  his  views  than  MHicz,  he  made  upon  his  hearers 
not  so  stormy  an  impression  as  his  predecessors  but,  on  the 
other  hand,  a  far  more  permanent  impression.  He  addressed 
himself  to  the  understanding,  aroused  reflection,  taught  and 
persuaded,  and  at  the  same  time  was  not  lacking  in  pungent 
utterance.  The  keenness  and  clearness  of  his  mind,  the  tact 
with  which  he  got  at  the  very  heart  of  subjects  under  discus- 
sion, the  ease  with  which  he  presented  a  case  before  his  hearers' 
eyes,  his  wide  reading,  especially  in  the  Scriptures,  the  de- 
cision and  the  logical  consequences  with  which  he  pressed 
home  a  whole  system  of  teachings  secured  for  him  great 
superiority  over  his  colleagues  and  contemporaries.  To  this 
were  added  moral  earnestness  of  character,  a  pious  mind,  a 
daily  life  in  which  enemies  could  find  no  stain,  glowing  de- 
votion for  the  moral  uplift  of  his  people  and  the  reformation 
of  the  church,  but  also  inconsiderate  boldness,  obstinacy,  and 
unyielding  conceit,  noticeable  ambition  for  popularity,  and 
an  ambition  which  looked  upon  a  martyr's  crown  as  the 
highest  aim  of  human  Ufe." 

•  Gesck.,  Ill,  I  :  214. 


CHAPTER  III 

HUSS'S  DEBT  TO  WYCLIF 

Wyclif  ...  the  master  of  deep  thoughts. — Huss,  A  pp.  Creed, 

Doubtless  Huss's  experiences  as  a  preacher  would  have 
been  a  repetition  of  the  experiences  of  his  predecessors  in  the 
pulpit  of  Prague,  had  not  a  new  element  of  religious  thought 
been  introduced  into  Bohemia  from  abroad.  Large  and  sym- 
pathetic audiences  would  have  hung  upon  his  words  and 
perhaps  rival  priests  and  monks  would  have  resented  his 
strictures  upon  their  clerical  habits  and  spied  out  suspicious 
or  heretical  passages  in  his  discourses  and  formulated  them 
in  charges.  Like  Matthias  of  Janow,  he  might  have  yielded 
to  authority  or,  as  did  Milicz,  have  gone  to  Rome  and  sought 
to  explain  his  utterances.  Instead  of  this,  his  career  ended 
in  the  awful  penalty  visited  upon  heretics.  The  explanation 
is  offered  in  the  foreign  influence  which  moved  him  at  the 
very  foundation  of  his  convictions  and  also  stirred  up  the 
university  of  Prague,  as  few  universities  have  been  stirred  by 
influences  from  without.  This  influence  was  the  personality 
and  teaching  of  John  Wyclif,  who  died  1384,  several  years 
before  Huss  entered  upon  his  studies  in  the  university,  and 
nearly  twenty  years  before  he  was  called  to  Bethlehem 
chapel.  By  the  Englishman's  writings  Huss  was  fed  and  by 
the  memory  of  his  personality  made  morally  strong. 

In  the  controversies  over  the  EngHsh  master's  teachings, 
in  which  the  university  of  Prague  was  involved,  Huss  stood 
out  as  the  chief  figure.  Not  because  he  had  preached  against 
the  abuses  of  the  clergy  was  he  excommunicated,  so  one  well 
acquainted  with  him,  Andrew  of  Broda,  said,  1414.  Be- 
cause he  was  the  advocate  and  defender  of  Wyclif  he  went 

43 


44  JOHN  HUSS 

to  the  stake.^  As  important  as  the  influence  of  Paul  upon 
the  mind  of  Luther  and  more  important  than  the  influence  of 
Calvin  upon  John  Knox,  was  the  influence  of  Wyclif  upon 
the  opinions  and  the  career  of  Huss.  Wyclif  was  the  original 
and  bolder  mind — the  pathfinder.  Huss  came  after,  was  re- 
ceptive, but,  as  it  proved,  made  a  deeper  impression  upon  his 
people.  As  moral  personalities  impelled  by  the  truth  they 
stand  out  with  equal  prominence  in  their  generations.  The 
first  year  of  his  pastorate  at  Bethlehem  had  not  passed  be- 
fore Huss  was  publicly  identified  with  the  Wyclifite  discus- 
sions which  were  to  agitate  the  university,  keep  in  turmoil 
the  body  of  its  professors  for  more  than  a  decade  and  also 
shake  the  ecclesiastical  foundations  of  the  Bohemian  nation. 
In  May,  1403,  Wyclif 's  teachings  were  brought  to  the  official 
attention  of  the  university  by  two  members  of  the  cathedral 
chapter  as  containing,  it  was  charged,  the  seeds  of  heretical 
error. 

The  university  of  Prague,  founded  by  a  double  charter 
from  the  pope  and  Charles  IV,  1347-1348,  at  once  became  the 
chief  ornament  of  the  Bohemian  capital  and  made  it  famous 
throughout  Europe  as  a  seat  of  study.  It  was  the  first  uni- 
versity north  of  the  Alps  in  Central  and  Northeastern  Europe. 
The  universities  of  Bologna,  Paris,  and  Oxford  alone  were 
more  famous.  Soon  after  their  origin  the  universities  of 
Europe  became  the  restless  centres  of  intellectual  and  literary 
life.  Democratic  in  their  constitution,  they  fostered  free 
inquiry  and  were  adapted  to  unsettle  inquiring  minds  in  the 
inherited  institutions  of  church  and  society.  They .  owed 
their  beginnings  to  the  enthusiasm  of  single  teachers,  but 
Innocent  III  and  other  popes,  quick  to  discern  their  impor- 
tance and  their  menace,  early  took  hold  of  them  and,  in  the 
case  of  Paris,  prescribed  its  curriculum.  However,  they  had 
a  hard  task  in  keeping  their  studies  within  safe  limits.  In  fact, 
masters  and  students — who  together  were  called  the  univer- 

*  Doc,  p.  520. 


HUSS'S   DEBT   TO   W\TLIF 


45 


sity — constituted  a  world  by  themselves,  a  distinct  corpora- 
tion. It  is  true  that  out  of  Bologna,  the  seat  of  the  study  of 
canon  law,  went  forth  the  great  popes,  Alexander  III  and  In- 
nocent III.  But  Paris  issued  some  of  the  severest  attacks 
against  the  theory  of  papal  absolutism.  With  that  institu- 
tion Gerson  and  d'Ailly  were  connected.  Wyclif's  teaching 
made  Oxford  a  seat  of  heresy.  Wittenberg,  the  last  of  the 
mediaeval  universities,  protected  and  fostered  Luther.  Hus- 
sitism  was  begotten  at  the  university  of  Prague. 

The  numbers  given  as  attending  the  universities  seem  to 
have  been  greatly,  exaggerated.  Paris  is  reported  to  have 
had  25,000  students  and  Oxford  30,000,  or,  according  to  Wyclif, 
prior  to  his  time  60,000,  though  for  his  own  day  he  gives  the 
reasonable  figure  of  3,000.  Prague  likewise  was  reported  to 
have  had  in  1408  by  one  who  hved  but  a  short  time  later 
30,000,  with  200  masters,  and  500  bachelors,  a  number  alto- 
gether extravagant,  according  to  Palacky.^  Flajshans  gives 
the  number  at  from  5,000  to  7,000,  a  number  which  includes 
retainers.  The  population  of  the  city  was  then  80,000. 
The  university  of  Prague,  which  had  been  preceded  by  a 
number  of  grammar-schools  connected  with  the  parish 
churches  of  the  city,  had  the  four  faculties — theology,  law, 
medicine,  and  philosophy.  In  1372  the  faculty  of  law  was 
made  a  distinct  body,  with  a  rector  of  its  own.  German 
students  who  had  flocked  to  Bologna  and  Paris,  in  the  absence 
of  other  universities  in  the  North,  now  turned  to  Prague. 
The  universities  of  Vienna  and  Heidelberg  were  not  founded 
till  1365  and  1385.  Partial  provision  was  made  at  Prague 
for  the  support  of  professors  by  gifts  from  the  royal  ex- 
chequer and  contributions  from  the  revenues  of  monasteries 
and  chapter  rights.  Several  special  foundations  were  endowed 
for  the  aid  of  poor  students. 

Oxford  is  mentioned  in  the  annals  of  the  Bohemian  uni- 

^Gesch.,  Ill,   I  :  183.     Rashdall,   2  :  584  sqq.,  makes   1,500  to  3,000  the 
maximum  number  at  Oxford.     Flajshans,  Mistr  J.  Hits,  p.  46.   - 


46  JOHN  HUSS 

versity  in  1367  when  the  faculty  of  philosophy  and  the  arts 
ordered  its  bachelors  to  use  for  their  comments  the  writings 
— scripta  et  dicta — of  its  professors  and  the  professors  of  Paris 
as  well  as  the  writings  of  members  of  the  Prague  faculties.^ 
The  masters  or  doctors  were  allowed  to  give  original  lectures 
of  their  own — propria  dicta  dare. 

The  German  element  in  the  Prague  faculties  and  student 
body  followed  the  principles  of  the  NominaHsts,  which  had 
been  adopted  at  Paris  and  taught  that  general  concepts  are 
mere  names  and  are  derived  from  individual  existences. 
Following  Wyclif  and  Oxford,  Huss  and  the  Czech  element 
fed  on  Reahsm,  which  taught  that  general  concepts  have  a 
real  existence.  Huss's  realism  was  brought  against  him  at 
his  trial  in  Constance. 

The  transmission  of  Wyclif's  writings  and  influence  to 
Bohemia  was  furthered  by  the  marriage  of  Richard  II  of 
England,  in  1382,  to  Anne  of  Luxemburg,  sister  of  the  Bo- 
hemian king,  Wenzel.  Anne,  who  died  in  1394,  was  a  woman 
of  culture  and  carried  with  her  to  England  copies  of  the 
Bible  in  Latin,  Czech  and  German.  Referring  to  the  queen's 
interest  in  the  Scriptures,  Huss  said  that  to  make  her  out  a 
heretic  for  having  the  Bible  in  translation  would  have  been  a 
Satanic  folly .^  Among  the  Bohemians  who  followed  Anne  to 
England  were  students  who  went  to  Oxford  for  study.  By 
the  teachings  of  WycHf,  Oxford  had  become  notorious  as  a 
seat  of  advanced  and  even  heretical  thought,  and  young  men 
predisposed  to  freedom  of  inquiry  would  easily  be  attracted 
there. 

At  any  rate,  in  Anne's  reign  Wyclif's  writings  were  carried 
to  Prague,  where  they  were  studied  in  the  university.  This 
is  clear  from  Huss's  own  testimony.  He  wrote  to  the  EngHsh 
CarmeUte,  John  Stokes,  in  141 1,  that  Prague  had  possessed 

iRashdall,  2  :  223.     Palacky,  Gesch.,  Ill,  i  :  188,  gives  quotations  from 
the  Mon.  Hist.  Univ.  Prag.,  recording  the  rule. 
^Mon.,  I  :  136. 


HUSS'S  DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  47 

and  been  reading  Wyclif's  works  for  twenty  years  and  more.^ 
The  statement  of  ^neas  Sylvius,  that  the  first  to  win  ill  fame 
in  Prague  by  introducing  Wyclif's  manuscripts  was  a  certain 
Faulfisch,  is  now  doubted,  and  this  person  is  identified  with 
Nicholas  Faulfisch,  who,  in  1306,  carried  with  him  to  Bohemia 
an  Oxford  document  attesting  Wyclif's  orthodoxy .2  It  is 
certain,  however,  that  among  the  earliest  Bohemian  students 
who  carried  copies  of  Wyclif's  writings  back  from  England 
to  Bohemia  was  Jerome  of  Prague  about  1401,  the  friend  of 
Huss  who  followed  him  to  the  stake.  On  his  trial  at  Constance 
Jerome  deposed  that  he  had  copied  Wyclif's  Dialogus  and 
Trialogus  and  carried  them  to  Prague.  Huss  perhaps  became 
acquainted,  if  not  with  Wyclif's  writings,  certainly  with  his 
teachings  while  he  was  still  a  student.  Some  of  his  teachers 
anticipated  him  in  the  knowledge  of  Wyclif's  tenets.  He 
himself  made  five  copies  of  Wyclif's  philosophical  writings 
which  are  extant  in  the  royal  library  of  Stockholm,  ''written 
with  his  own  hand,  1398,"  and  carried  off  by  the  Swedes, 
1648,  and  he  also  made  a  translation  of  the  Trialogus. 

As  for  Wyclif's  doctrines,  according  to  Sigismund's 
testimony  at  the  council  of  Constance,  they  were  known  and 
spread  in  Bohemia  when  that  king  was  but  a  youth.^  Sigis- 
mund  was  born  1368.  Wyclif's  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
was  known  in  Bohemia  before  1400  and  had  already  at  that 
time  unsettled  some  minds.  One  of  these  was  the  distin- 
guished Czech  writer,  Thomas  of  Stitny,  who,  writing  in  1400, 
when  he  was  in  his  seventieth  year,  declared  his  faith  in  the 
transubstantiation  of  the  elements  had  been  shaken.* 

Wyclif's  name  was  held  in  even  more  honor  in  Bohemia 
than  in  his  native  land.  In  England,  under  the  name  of 
Lollards,   dissenters  adopted  and  perpetuated  some  of  his 

*  Mon.,  I  :  135. 

^  Hist,  of  Bohemia,  chap.  35.     See  Loserth,  p.  70  sqq. 
^  Doc,  p.  315. 

*  Palacky,  Gesch.,  Ill,  i  :  190.  Loserth,  p.  75  sq.  On  Stitny  as  a  leader  of 
Bohemian  culture,  see  Palacky,  p.  187  sqq. 


48  JOHN  HUSS 

teachings,  as  they  also  used  his  translation  of  the  Bible. 
But  his  leading  sympathizers  recanted.  In  Bohemia  the  very 
names,  Wyclifite  and  Wyclifist,  were  given  to  dissenters  to 
indicate  the  extent  of  his  influence.  In  Bohemia  WycHf  was 
called  the  fifth  evangelist.  Huss  himself,  in  141 2,  was  called 
by  some  of  the  Prague  clergy  in  an  appeal  to  the  pope  a  "son 
of  iniquity,  a  Wyclifist,"  the  two  expressions  being  practically 
synonymous.^  Gradually,  after  Huss's  death,  the  designa- 
tion Hussite  superseded  that  of  Wyclifist. 

No  man  of  the  Middle  Ages,  if  we  except  Marsiglius  of 
Padua,  was  so  independent  in  his  thought  or  quite  so  fearless 
in  his  utterances  as  John  Wyclif,^  and  no  churchman  in  the 
history  of  Christendom,  not  even  Luther,  has  been  more 
merciless  in  his  attacks  upon  the  existing  church  order  or  more 
uncompromising  in  his  assaults  upon  the  failings  of  popes. 
He  had  none  of  Luther's  good  humor,  but  his  pen  was  as  keen 
and  mordant  as  a  Damascus  blade.  Wyclif  was  a  Schoolman 
and  professor  at  Oxford.  But  he  was  more  than  a  scholastic. 
He  was  a  patriot,  a  popular  preacher,  and  the  champion  of 
practical  religious  as  well  as  theological  reform.  Strange  to 
say,  it  was  not  until  the  closing  decades  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury that  an  effort  was  carried  through  to  publish  his  works 
and  not  until  the  middle  of  that  century  did  his  translation 
of  the  Bible  appear  in  print.  Through  the  labors  of  the 
Wyclif  society  a  stately  array  of  his  Latin  works  have  been 
set  before  the  public  as  also  his  English  treatises,  tracts  and 
sermons  through  the  editorial  care  of  Arnold  and  Mathews. 
His  tracts  form  a  distinct  chapter  in  the  rich  history  of  Eng- 
lish tractarian  literature.  They  differ  from  the  tracts  of  the 
Puritan  age  and  the  Oxford  movement  in  this,  that  they  had 
practically  no  opponents  who  replied  with  the  pen.  They  and 
Wyclif's  followers  were  met  by  the  methods  of  the  inquisition 
and  with  fire. 

'  Doc,  p.  460.     See  Loserth,  p.  83  sqq.,  and  below. 

2  For  Wyclif,  see  Schaff's  Church  History,  V,  2  :  314-358. 


HUSS'S  DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  49 

As  a  patriot,  Wyclif  gave  his  voice  and  pen  to  the  Good 
Parliament  of  1376,  which  repudiated  the  papal  right  to  col- 
lect the  annual  tribute  pledged  by  King  John  when  he  yielded 
England  up  as  a  fief  to  the  apostolic  see.  The  popular  feel- 
ing against  the  usurpations  and  exactions  of  Rome  and  the 
monks  found  popular  expression  through  Piers  Ploughman, 
who  exclaimed:  ''Take  her  lands,  ye  lords,  and  let  her  live  by 
domes  "-tithes.  The  mutterings  of  the  nation  against  foreign 
ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  which  had  been  heard  since  the 
reign  of  William  the  Conqueror,  found  in  Wyclif  a  more  cul- 
tured and  no  less  determined  mouthpiece  than  the  Plough- 
man. With  a  frankness  which  is  startUng,  he  preached  and 
wrote  against  the  friars,  their  idleness  and  good  Uving,  and 
against  the  pope's  secular  authority.  The  old  chronicler  por- 
trays him  as  running  about  from  place  to  place  and  barking 
against  the  church.  He  contended  that  the  lords,  in  case  of 
necessity,  might  seize  the  possessions  of  the  clergy,  and  the 
pope  he  styled  the  antichrist,  the  proud  and  worldly  priest 
of  Rome,  the  most  cursed  of  clippers  and  cut-purses. 

It  was  not  until  the  last  year  of  his  life  that  Wyclif  at- 
tacked systematically  the  strictly  dogmatic  tenets  brought  to 
perfection  by  the  mediaeval  church.  As  early  as  1377  he  was 
under  the  condemnation  of  the  church  authorities.  Sum- 
moned in  that  year  before  Courtenay,  bishop  of  London,  he 
was  protected  by  the  duke  of  Lancaster,  but  the  pope,  Gregory 
XI,  took  up  his  case  and  issued  a  batch  of  at  least  five  bulls 
against  him  addressed  to  the  king,  to  the  university  of  Ox- 
ford, the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  the  bishop  of  London. 
These  bulls  condemned  nineteen  articles  taken  from  his  writ- 
ings as  dangerous  to  state  and  church.  Gregory  called  upon 
Archbishop  Sudbury  to  imprison  Wyclif  until  final  sentence 
should  be  passed  by  the  papal  court ^  and,  addressing  the 
chancellor  of  Oxford,  he  charged  WycHf  with  vomiting  out 
from  the  filthy  dungeon  of  his  heart  most  wicked  and  dam- 

*  Gee  and  Hardy,  Documents,  105  sqq. 


50  JOHN  HUSS 

nable  heresies,  by  which  he  proposed  to  bring  destruction  upon 
church  and  state  aUke.  The  pontiff  put  him  into  the  same 
category  with  those  arch-destroyers  and  heretics,  Marsiglius 
of  Padua  and  John  of  Jandun. 

Among  the  nineteen  condemned  articles  were  the  proposi- 
;  tions  that  priestly  and  papal  excommunication  is  of  no  avail 
if  not  in  accord  with  the  law  of  Christ  and  that  even  a  pope 
may  be  lawfully  impeached  by  laymen.  In  spite  of  the  papal 
edict,  they  were  pronounced  by  the  Oxford  masters  true,  al- 
though to  the  ear  they  sounded  ill. 

WycHf  saw  the  papal  schism  established  and  lived  six 
years  after  its  inception,  a  period  fully  long  enough  for  him 
to  discern  the  evils  arising  from  a  dual  papal  government 
iand  to  have  forced  upon  his  mind  the  question  of  the  origin 
'.and  authority  of  the  papacy  and  the  question  of  the  nature 
'and  functions  of  the  church.  In  pointing  out  abuses  in 
church  administration  and  doctrine,  he  went  beyond  Mar- 
siglius of  Padua  and  undertook  the  positive  work  of  con- 
struction. Like  John  Wesley,  and  General  Booth  of  the  Sal- 
vation Army,  he  undertook  to  relieve  the  spiritual  destitution 
of  England  by  sending  out  a  body  of  "pore  priests,"  as  they 
were  called,  and  laymen  who  should  preach  the  Gospel  up  and 
down  the  land — men  whom  Bishop  Courtenay  arraigned  as 
"itinerant  preachers  who  teach  erroneous,  yea,  heretical  asser- 
tions, publicly,  not  only  in  churches  but  also  in  public  squares 
and  other  profane  places,  and  who  do  this  under  the  guise  of 
great  holiness,  but  without  having  obtained  any  episcopal  or 
papal  authority." 

"In  138 1,"  so  Walden  reports,  "  Wyclif  began  to  determine 
matters  upon  the  sacrament  of  the  altar."  The  denial  of 
^  transubstantiation  constituted  the  subject  of  the  first  three 
of  the  twenty-four  articles  listed  against  him  by  the  Earth- 
quake council,  which  met  in  1382  under  the  presidency  of 
Courtenay.  Christ,  Wyclif  asserted,  is  not  in  the  sacrament 
of  the  altar  essentially,  truly  and  really  in  his  own  corporal 


HUSS'S  DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  51 

presence.  The  other  more  important  heresies  ascribed  to  him 
were  that  a  bishop  or  priest  in  mortal  sin  cannot  ordain,  con-  ^^ 
secrate,  or  baptize;  that  after  Urban  VI's  death  the  English 
church  should  acknowledge  no  pope  but  become  independent 
like  the  Greeks  and  that  it  is  contrary  to  Scripture  for  ec-  . 
clesiastics  to  hold  temporal  possessions.  Wyclif  was  inhibited 
from  preaching  at  Oxford  and  was  thenceforth  confined  to  his 
parish  of  Lutterworth. 

The  chronicler,  Walsingham,  no  doubt  represented  the 
official  clerical  opinion  when  he  characterized  the  death  of 
Wychf  as  ''the  death  of  that  instrument  of  the  devil,  that 
enemy  of  the  church,  that  author  of  confusion  to  the  common 
people,  that  image  of  hypocrites,  that  idol  of  heretics,  that 
maker  of  schism,  that  sower  of  hatred,  that  coiner  of  lies,  who, 
when  he  died,  breathed  out  his  malicious  spirit  into  the  abodes 
of  darkness."  The  dead  was  not  left  in  peace.  By  Archbishop 
Arundel's  bidding,  Wyclif's  writings  were  suppressed  and  by  ; 
the  Lateran  decree  of  1414  were  ordered  burned.  And  against 
his  followers  the  English  Parliament,  in  1401,  issued  the  law 
that  heretics  should  be  burned.  The  list  of  nineteen  errors 
ascribed  to  him  by  Gregory  XI  grew  enormously.  The 
council  of  Constance  accepted  forty-five.  Netter  of  Walden 
increased  the  number  to  more  than  threescore.  An  Oxford 
doctor  of  divinity,  the  Bohemian  John  Lucke,  enlarged  it  to 
two  hundred  and  sixty-six,  and  Cochlaeus,  in  his  work  against 
the  Hussites,  to  three  hundred  and  three  heresies,  a  weight 
heavy  enough,  it  would  seem,  to  crush  the  most  callous  of 
heretics  and  appalling  enough  to  frighten  away  any  good 
churchman. 

Almost  all  the  distinctive  doctrines  elaborated  by  the 
mediaeval  theology  were  either  questioned  or  flatly  denied  by 
Wyclif.  He  insisted  that  the  Bible  should  be  put  into  the 
hands  of  the  people.  It  is  the  Book  of  Life — liber  vitcB — the 
Christian  Faith — fides  Christiana — the  whole  truth,  the  im- 
maculate law.     Its  authority  is  supreme  and  its  precepts  to 


52  JOHN  HUSS 

be  obeyed,  no  matter  what  the  church  may  set  up  as  command- 
ments. The  priesthood's  chief  duty  is  to  make  known  its 
contents.  Every  Christian  should  have  it  in  his  native 
tongue,  that  he  may  follow  Christ  and  come  to  heaven, 
Huss  knew  of  WycHf's  translation  and  in  his  reply  to  John 
Stokes  made  the  statement  that  WycUf  had  translated  the 
whole  Bible  out  of  the  Latin  into  Anglo-Saxon.^ 

In  taking  this  position  in  regard  to  translations  of  the 
Bible  and  their  popular  circulation,  as  well  as  in  regard  to  its 
supreme  authority  to  which  every  individual  has  the  right  to 
appeal,  Wyclif  was  out  of  accord  with  his  times.  In  1408  the 
synod  of  Oxford  forbade  translations  in  the  absence  of  church 
authority.  ''The  complement  of  the  wickedness  of  John 
Wyclif,  that  pestilent  writer  of  damnable  memory,"  Arch- 
bishop Arundel  pronounced  to  be  that,  "he  prepared  a  new 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  his  mother  tongue."  And 
the  year  before  Huss's  death  the  English  Parliament  forbade 
the  reading  of  the  English  Scriptures  upon  forfeiture  of  "land, 
cattle,  life  and  goods." 

WycHf's  definition  of  the  church  as  the  body  of  the  elect 
was  opposed  to  the  current  tenet  that  the  church  is  the  cor- 
poration of  the  baptized  presided  over  by  the  pope  and  hier- 
archy and  the  popular  idea  that  the  church  is  the  pope  and 
the  cardinals.  As  for  the  papacy,  Wyclif  uttered  far  more 
vigorous  words  about  individual  popes  than  did  Huss.  He 
put  pontiffs  into  hell  as  freely  as  did  Dante.  He  declared  not 
only  that  the  papacy  is  not  infaUible  but  likewise  that  it  is 
^  not  necessary  to  the  church.  Obedience  to  it  is  always  to  be 
determined  by  the  agreement  of  the  papal  commands  with 
the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures.  Basing  his  doctrine  of  the 
keys  and  his  attack  upon  the  worldly  dominion  of  the  papacy 
upon  his  interpretation  of  Matt.  16,  Wychf  also  was  the 
forerunner  of  Huss.  But  in  one  vital  respect  Huss  held  back 
from  the  Englishman's  views— the  doctrine  of  the  eucharist. 
^  Monumenta,  i  :  136. 


HUSS'S   DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  53 

Not  without  uncertainty,  at  one  time  in  his  career  as  it  would 
appear  from  the  testimony  of  others,  Huss  held  to  the  old 
view. 

The  charge  of  holding  to  the  remanence  of  the  material 
elements  continued  to  be  made  against  him  to  his  dying 
breath.  However,  his  writings  stand  for  the  doctrine  of  tran- 
substantiation.  In  one  of  his  Bohemian  sermons  on  the 
Apostles'  Creed  he  set  forth  this  view  when  he  said:  "The 
humble  priest  doth  not  exalt  himself  above  the  Virgin  Mary 
or  say  that  he  is  the  creator  of  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  but 
that  the  Lord  Christ  by  his  power  and  word,  through  him, 
causes  that  which  is  bread  to  be  his  body;  not  that  at  that 
time  it  began  to  be  his  but  that  there  on  the  altar  begins  to 
be  sacramentally  in  the  form  of  the  bread  what  previously 
was  not  there  and  therein."^  Further  reference  to  Huss's 
position  in  this  matter  will  be  made  later. 

The  English  reformer,  abandoning  the  doctrine  of  trans- 
mutation, pronounced  it  a  novelty  taught  by  the  modern 
church — novella  ecclesia.    He  praised  God  for  having  been  de- 
livered from  the  laughable  and  scandalous  errors  taught  in 
regard  to  it.     It  is  a  lying  fable  and  idolatry.     Christ  is  in 
the  elements  virtually  and  potentially  as  a  king  is  in  his 
dominion  and  the  sunhght  in  the  glass,  and  in  no  other  way. 
In  breaking  the  glass  you  do  not  break  the  sunbeam.    The^> 
impossibility  of  an  elemental  transubstantiation  Wyclif  based   I-    ^ 
upon  the  philosophical  consideration  that  the  substance  of  \ 
a  thing  cannot  be  separated  from  its  accidents  or  propertyj^ 
Transubstantiation  necessitates  transaccidentation.     He  also 
laid  stress  upon  the  figurative  meaning  of  Christ's  language 
instituting  the  Supper.     The  theory  that  the  substance  is 
changed  while  the  accidents  remain  he  pronounced  "grounded 
nether  in  Holy  Writt  ne  reson  ne  wit  but  only  taughte  by 
newe  hypocritis  and  cursed  heretikis  that  magnyfyen  there 
own  fantasies  and  dremes." 

^  Erben,  quoted  by  Wratislaw,  p.  352. 


54  JOHN  HUSS 

These  and  other  teachings,  carried  from  the  older  uni- 
versity across  the  channel  to  Bohemia,  took  root  not  only 
among  certain  of  the  clergy  but  also  among  the  nobility, 
and  threatened  the  old  religious  order.  Before  the  first  clash 
occurred  in  the  halls  of  the  university  of  Prague,  it  seemed 
as  if  the  entire  theological  faculty  were  going  over  to  Wyclif . 
But  the  faculties  soon  became  divided  into  two  antagonistic 
factions.  Among  those  who  imbibed  the  Wyclifite  principles 
before  Huss  were  his  teachers  and  warm  friends,  Stanislaus 
of  Znaim  and  Peter  Palecz;  and  the  saying  went  about  that 
Wyclif  begat  Stanislaus  of  Znaim,  Stanislaus  of  Znaim  begat 
Peter  of  Znaim,  Peter  of  Znaim  begat  Palecz,  and  Palecz 
begat  Huss.^  When  the  church  began  to  proceed  in  earnest 
against  Wychfism,  all  but  Huss  abandoned  their  views  and 
became  willing  subjects  to  the  church  authorities. 

The  formal  breaking-out  of  the  dissension  over  Wyclif  is 
set  by  the  chronicle  of  the  university  on  September  28,  1403, 
the  date  on  which  the  articles,  presented  by  the  two  mem- 
bers of  the  cathedral  chapter,  were  appointed  to  be  read, 
discussed  and  finally  determined.  They  consisted  of  the 
twenty-four  articles  condemned  at  the  Earthquake  council, 
1382,  and  twenty-one  others  extracted,  or  alleged  to  be  ex- 
tracted, from  Wyclif's  writings  by  John  Hiibner,  a  Pole  and 
a  master  in  the  Prague  university.^  The  main  propositions 
were  as  follows:  The  substance  of  bread  remains  in  the  sac- 
rament after  the  words  of  institution,  and  Christ  is  not  cor- 
porally present. — A  bishop  or  priest  hving  in  mortal  sin  can- 
not ordain,  consecrate  at  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  baptize. — It 
is  heresy  to  assert  that  it  is  of  the  essence  of  the  Gospel 
that  Christ  ordained  the  mass. — Where  there  is  true  contri- 

^  Huss's  Reply  to  Palecz,  Mon.,  i  :  318. 

'^  A.  D.  1403  incepit  notahiUs  dissensio  in  clero  regni  Bohemia,  magistris, 
sacerdotibus  et  prelatis,  propter  quosdam  articulos  ex  J.  Wyclejf  doctoris  Anglici 
libris  non  bene  extractos.  Palacky,  III,  i  :  196.  See  also  Berger,  XXXV, 
XXXVI.  Doc,  p.  328-331,  gives  all  the  XLV  Articles  and  Gee  and  Hardy, 
Documents,  p.  108  sqq.,  gives  the  twenty-four. 


HUSS'S   DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  55 

tion  of  heart,  outward  confession  is  of  no  profit. — God  ought 
to  obey  the  devil. — A  reprobate  pope  is  a  member  of  the 
devil's  household  and  has  no  authority  over  the  faithful. — 
The  Holy  Spirit  forbids  clerics  to  hold  worldly  possessions. 
— No  prelate  may  pronounce  excommunication  unless  he  know 
beforehand  that  God  has  excommunicated  the  ofTender. — A 
prelate  excommunicating  one  who  has  appealed  to  the  king 
is  a  traitor  to  God  and  the  civil  power. — Those  who,  on  ac- 
count of  a  decree  of  excommunication,  cease  to  preach  the 
Word  of  God  or  to  listen  to  it  are  excommunicate. — A  deacon 
or  presbyter  may  preach  in  the  absence  of  license  from  pope 
or  prelate. — No  one  in  mortal  sin  may  exercise  the  author- 
ity of  civil  lord  or  prelate. — Temporal  lords  may  seize  the 
worldly  possessions  of  clerics  who  habitually  offend. — The 
public  may  at  will  rebuke  offending  lords. — Tithes  are  pure 
alms  and  parishioners  may  withhold  them  from  offending 
curates. — Those  who  enter  a  religious  order  are  made  more 
foolish  thereby  and  less  capable  of  obedience  to  God's  com- 
mands.— Holy  men  endowing  religious  orders  have  sinned 
in  so  doing. — Friars  ought  to  support  themselves  by  the 
labor  of  their  hands. — The  prayers  of  the  reprobate  are 
of  no  avail. — All  things  come  of  necessity. — Universities, 
university  studies,  and  the  graduation  of  masters  profit  the 
church  as  little  as  the  devil  does. — To  endow  the  clergy  is 
against  Christ's  law. — Constantine  erred  in  endowing  the 
church. — The  church  of  Rome  is  the  synagogue  of  Satan  and 
the  pope  is  not  the  immediate  vicar  of  Christ. — The  election 
of  the  pope  by  cardinals  was  introduced  by  the  devil. — It  is 
not  necessary  to  salvation  that  one  believe  that  the  Roman 
church  is  supreme  over  other  churches. — The  belief  in  in- 
dulgences is  foolish. — Augustine,  Benedict  and  Bernard  were 
damned  if  they  did  not  repent  of  having  had  worldly  pos- 
sessions and  having  founded  religious  orders. 

By  a  majority  vote,  the  university  forbade  all  to  hold, 
preach,  or  assert  these  articles  either  in  private  or  in  public. 


56  JOHN  HUSS 

Our  record  has  come  down  to  us  certified  by  the  seal  of  an 
imperial  notary  who  was  present.  The  presiding  officer  on 
the  occasion  was  the  Bavarian,  Walter  Harasser,  who  suc- 
ceeded Huss  as  university  rector.  Instead  of  healing  dif- 
ferences, as  has  been  said,  this  decision  was  the  real  starting- 
point  of  the  religious  controversy  which  raged  in  Prague  for 
a  dozen  years  or  more.  Many  of  the  articles  concerned  ques- 
tions about  which  there  was  wide-spread  unrest  in  the  church, 
such  as  the  nature  of  the  ei^charistic  sacrament,  the  valid- 
ity of  prelatical  fulminations,  and  the  liability  of  clerics  to 
deposition,  even  by  the  civil  power,  for  unworthy  conduct. 
The  charge  was  made  and  properly,  that  some  of  the  articles 
misstated  Wyclif's  opinion  and  Huss  wanted  to  know  whether 
the  falsifiers  of  a  man's  teachings  were  not  as  deserving  of 
punishment  as  were  two  men  who  a  short  time  before  had 
been  burned  in  Prague  for  adulterating  saffron.  Stanislaus  of 
Znaim  went  to  such  lengths  in  defending  the  articles  that 
some  of  the  masters  refused  to  listen  and  left  the  room. 
Throwing  a  copy  of  one  of  Wyclif's  writings  on  the  table, 
Palecz  announced  his  readiness  to  defend  it  in  the  face  of 
any  one  who  dared  to  say  a  single  word  against  it. 

The  obligation  which  Huss  was  under  to  Wyclif,  for  large 
paragraphs  in  his  writings,  will  be  referred  to  further  on. 
It  is  enough  here  to  say  again  that  Huss  was  considered  to 
be  Wyclif's  faithful  disciple.  The  Englishman  Stokes  rep- 
resented this  opinion  at  the  council  of  Constance,  when  he 
said  to  him:  "Why  do  you  glory  in  these  writings,  falsely 
labelling  them  as  your  own,  since,  after  all,  they  belong  not 
to  you  but  to  Wyclif,  in  whose  steps  you  are  following?" 
Certain  it  is,  that  Huss  was  deeply  infected  with  Wyclif- 
ism,  and  it  was  chiefly  for  his  attachment  to  Wyclif  that  he 
got  into  trouble  at  Prague  and  was  burned  at  Constance. 

There  is  no  evidence  to  bear  out  the  statement,  made  by 
yEneas  Sylvius  in  his  History  of  Bohemia,  that  Huss  had  de- 
rived  his  views   from   the  Waldenses.     yEneas,   who   spent 


HUSS'S  DEBT  TO  WYCLIF  57 

some  time  in  Bohemia  and  calls  the  Waldensian  sect  wicked, 
an  insanity  and  a  leprosy,  mentions  amongst  its  dogmas, 
that  bishops  are  equal  to  the  Roman  pontiff,  there  is  no  dif- 
ference between  priests,  the  lives  and  not  the  sacerdotal  dig- 
nity of  priests  are  of  avail,  there  is  no  purgatorial  fire,  prayers 
for  the  dead  are  useless  and  the  invention  of  priestly  avarice, 
images  of  the  saints  are  to  be  destroyed,  priests  should  re- 
main poor  and  be  content  with  alms,  every  one  is  free  to 
preach  the  Word  of  God,  auricular  confession  is  of  no  avail, 
prayers  to  the  saints  are  useless  for  they  cannot  help  us  and 
it  is  enough  to  confess  our  sins  in  secret. 

The  followers  of  Peter  Waldo  very  early  carried  their 
doctrines  across  the  Alps  and  planted  them  in  the  diocese  of 
Passau,  just  beyond  the  frontier  of  Bohemia,  and  to  other 
parts  of  Austria.  In  the  early  part  of  the  fourteenth  century 
a  bishop  estimated  their  numbers  at  eighty-five  thousand,  and 
Dominican  and  Franciscan  inquisitors  were  despatched  to 
Passau  to  put  the  heresy  down. 

Nowhere  does  Huss  make  the  slightest  intimation  that  he 
was  in  any  way  dependent  upon  the  Waldenses  for  his  teach- 
ings. The  fact  that  he  laid  stress  upon  the  primary  principle 
in  vogue  among  them  expressed  in  the  words:  "We  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  than  man"  is  probably  only  a  coincidence. 
The  Bohemian  Brethren,  who  were  followers  of  Huss,  drew 
from  the  Waldenses.  Gerson  and  other  writers  at  the  time 
of  the  council  of  Constance  joined  together  the  Waldenses 
and  the  Wyclifists  as  flagrant  copartners  in  heretical  de- 
pravity. Huss  explicitly  denied  all  dependence  upon  the 
Waldensian  heresy.^ 

'  Gerson,  Du  Pin's  ed.,  2  :  227,  etc.     Doc,  32.     Mon.,  I  :  371,  379.     Schafif, 
Ch.  Hist.,  V,  part  i,  p.  493  sqq.     Flajshans,  37,  38. 


CHAPTER  IV 

HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER 

Super  omnia  vincit  Veritas:  vincit,  qui  occiditur,  quia  ei  nulla  nocet 
adversitas,   si    nulla  ei  dominatur   itiiquitas. — Letter    to  Christian  of 
Prachaticz,  1413. 
p  Above  all  else^  truth  conquers.     He  conquers  who  is  put  to  death 

j  because  no  adversity  harms  him  if  no  iniquity  has  rule  over  him. 

Three  mighty  currents  were  running  through  the  life  of 
Prague.  The  first,  a  moral  movement,  involved  the  moral 
improvement  and  efficiency  of  the  clergy;  the  second,  a 
movement  of  doctrinal  reform,  centering  in  the  views  of 
Wyclif;  the  third,  a  patriotic  movement  in  which  the  Czech 
population  were  seeking  supremacy  over  the  German  ele- 
ment and  the  management  of  all  Bohemian  affairs. 

In  all  three,  as  a  preacher  of  righteousness,  as  a  religious 
reformer  and  as  a  patriot,  Huss  was  the  acknowledged  leader. 
He  had  the  elements  of  popularity  and  leadership.  His  sin- 
cerity of  purpose  was  evident,  his  devotion  constant,  his  en- 
ergy unflagging,  his  courage  fearless,  his  daily  life  Hfted  above 
reproach.  His  moral  earnestness  and  power  of  utterance  at 
first  attracted  the  confidence  and  then  aroused  the  hostihty 
of  the  archbishop  of  Prague,  Zbynek  of  Hasenberg,  but  bound 
^^//  a  large  constituency  of  the  people  firmly  to  himself  and  won 
the  friendship,  if  not  the  determined  support,  of  the  court 
with  the  king,  Wenzel,  and  his  consort  Sophia.  Like  Atha- 
nasius,  as  it  would  seem,  he  was  by  nature  shrinking,  and  his 
boldness  was  the  product  of  a  moral  conviction  strong  as 
steel.  The  temper  of  his  thoughts  was  not  in  accord  with 
the  general  principles  which  the  church  had  learned  from 
the  Schoolmen  and  the  great  popes.  Huss  did  not  go  as  far 
as  Wyclif  in  the  expression  of  dissent  and,  like  Luther  at  the 

58 


n 


HUSS   AS   A   NATIONAL  LEADER  59 

first,  he  thought  himself  to  be  in  full  agreement  with  the 
church's  teachings.  In  this  he  was  mistaken,  but  his  mental 
temper  was  antagonistic  to  the  attitude  of  the  Schoolmen,  im-  ^^%-^ 
posed  by  them  and  the  popes  upon  their  times.  He  was 
consciously  a  reformer  of  church  discipline  and  morals,  un- 
consciously a  reformer  of  its  doctrinal  position  upon  the  basis 
of  Scripture,  as  he  understood  it,  and  as  the  supreme  consti-  ' 

tution  of  the  church.  -* 

In  1403,  after  a  year's  vacancy,  the  see  of  Prague  was 
filled  by  the  appointment  of  Zbynek  Zajik  of  Hasenberg, 
whom  we  shall  know  here  as  Archbishop  Zbynek.  He  was 
the  fifth  incumbent  of  the  see.  Two  of  his  predecessors, 
Arnest  of  Pardubicz  and  John  of  Jenzenstein,  were  men  of  more 
than  ordinary  abifity  as  administrators.  One  of  them,  Ocko 
of  Wlaschim,  was  the  first  Bohemian  to  be  made  a  cardinal, 
1379.  Arnest  was  bent  upon  church  reform  and  his  pro- 
vincial statutes  were  long  referred  to  as  a  code  fitted  to 
correct  clerical  remissness  and  vice.  On  occasion,  Huss,  who 
called  Arnest  "the  holy  archbishop,"  referred  to  these  stat- 
utes, as  to  the  article  ordering  fornicating  clergymen  to  be 
deprived  of  their  living  and  expelled  from  the  diocese,  and 
archdeacons  and  parish  priests  who  connived  at  such  vice 
to  be  condemned  as  though  they  were  guilty  of  the  same 
crime.^  Zbynek  was  a  soldier  as  well  as  a  priest — no  scholar  "7 
— and  the  rumor  went  that  he  was  unable  to  read.  He  is  J 
said  to  have  been  the  last  of  the  Bohemian  archbishops  to 
wield  the  sword  and  go  at  the  head  of  armies.  In  1404,  lead- 
ing the  king's  troops,  he  dislodged  the  robber  chieftain  Nicholas 
Zul,  and  two  years  later  engaged  in  campaigns  in  Bavaria. 
To  Zul,  Huss  became  spiritual  ad\'iser,  accompanying  him 
to  the  gallows.  Such  an  influence  did  Huss  exercise  that 
the  brigand  asked  the  throng  who  stood  by  to  pray  to  God 
that  he  might  be  forgiven. 

An  early  distinction  which  Huss  received  from  the  arch- 
'  ExposUio  Decalogi,  ed.  Flajshans,  p.  27. 


6o  JOHN  HUSS 

bishop  was  his  appointment  as  synodal  preacher,  1404,  a 
distinction  which  he  received  a  number  of  times  thereafter. 
By  the  appointment  of  the  first  archbishop,  Arnest,  the  synod 
of  Prague  met  twice  a  year  for  the  discussion  of  the  religious 
condition  of  the  diocese  and  the  promotion  of  the  efficiency 
of  the  clergy.  So  much  confidence  had  Zbynek  in  Huss's 
purity  of  purpose  that  he  instructed  him  to  bring  to  his 
attention  any  irregularities  in  the  fives  of  the  clergy  of  which 
he  might  become  cognizant.  Huss  took  his  appointment  se- 
riously, and  in  a  letter  addressed  to  the  archbishop  in  1408 
spoke  of  the  responsibifity  which  the  charge  had  imposed, 
and  at  the  same  time  complained  that  criminal  priests  were 
indulging  vices  without  rebuke  while  priests  in  lowly  positions 
and  faithful  in  the  performance  of  their  duties  were  being 
imprisoned  or  exiled  as  though  they  were  heretics.  Zbynek 
supported  the  progressive  movement  and  the  intellectual 
freedom  which  were  being  furthered  by  Huss,  Palecz,  and 
other  preachers.  This  favor  was  openly  given  until  1407, 
when  Huss  delivered  the  last  of  the  synodal  discourses.  In 
these  discourses  he  proceeded  from  attacks  on  the  indiffer- 
ence and  laxness  of  the  priests  of  Prague  to  attacks  upon  the 
archbishop  and  the  pope  himself. 

In  spite  of  the  efforts  of  the  first  archbishop  of  Prague  to 
advance  clerical  purity  and  efficiency,  the  visitation  records 
of  Huss's  time  show  that  priests  kept  concubines  in  separate 
houses,  had  sons  and  daughters,  were  guilty  of  promiscuous 
fornication  and  adultery,  and  entered  into  taverns  and  par- 
ticipated in  the  convivialities.  Huss  charged  them  not  only 
with  unchastity  but  with  simony  and  avarice,  making  ecclesi- 
astical acts  the  means  of  personal  gain  and  self-indulgence. 
In  his  Bohemian  sermons,  he  says  the  present  backsliding 
priests  have  so  fenced  themselves  with  antichristian  ordi- 
nances that  if  any  one  takes  aught  from  a  priest,  even  justly, 
or  if  a  priest  is  seized  in  the  commission  of  adultery  or  rob- 
bery, a  stop  is  immediately  put  to  the  divine  services,  espe- 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  6i 

dally  if  the  priestly  adulterer  or  robber  is  imprisoned.  If, 
again,  a  box  on  the  ear  is  given  to  a  priest  in  a  quarrel  in  a 
tavern,  and  there  is  a  dispute  about  dice  or  women,  cita- 
tions and  excommunications  are  issued.  If,  however,  a 
priest's  blood  be  drawn,  they  put  a  stop  to  divine  services 
and  compel  the  guilty  person  to  go  to  Rome,  saying  that 
none  save  the  pope  can  absolve  a  man  who  draws  a  priest's 
blood.  But,  if  a  priest  cuts  off  a  person's  foot  or  hand  or 
kills  an  irmocent  person,  neither  is  the  priest  put  under  the 
ban  nor  a  stop  put  to  divine  services.  Why  so?  Because 
one  devil  does  not  pick  out  another  devil's  eye.^  Huss's 
reference  to  the  exemption  of  priests  from  punishment  re- 
minds us  of  what  Luther  said  in  his  address  to  the  German 
nobility:  "If  a  priest  is  killed,  the  whole  country  is  laid 
under  the  interdict.     Why  not  also  if  a  peasant  is  killed?" 

Again,  Huss  said  from  the  pulpit:  "  Our  bishops  and  priests 
of  to-day,  and  especially  our  cathedral  canons,  and  lazy  mass- 
celebrators,  hardly  wait  for  the  close  of  the  service  to  hurry 
out  of  church,  one  part  to  the  tavern  and  the  other  part 
hither  and  thither  to  engage  in  amusements  unworthy  of  a 
priest,  yea,  even  to  dance.  The  monks  prepare  dances  and 
entertainments  in  the  public  houses  in  the  hope  of  winning 
the  people  and  being  intrusted  with  masses,  and  these  ras- 
cally ministers  of  the  devil  never  for  a  moment  think  that 
at  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  Christ  gives  to  the 
disciples  his  own  body  and  blood.  .  .  .  Like  Judas,  who 
went  away  to  the  high  priest  to  sell  Christ,  many  of  our 
priests,  profligate  in  their  lives  like  beasts,  run  away  from  the 
table  of  God,  the  one  to  serve  mammon,  the  other  wanton- 
ness, the  one  to  the  gaming-table,  the  other  to  the  dance  or 
chase,  all  of  which  are  forbidden  to  priests.  And  these  very 
ones  who  ought  to  be  leaders  in  imitating  Christ  are  his 
chief  enemies." 

In  another  sermon,   he  exclaimed:    "Has  a  church  no 

^Langsdorff,  p.  57.  For  quotations  from  the  parish  registers,  see  Loserth, 
295-301. 


\ 


62  JOHN   HUSS 

vested  property,  then  it  has  no  priests.  Whence  arise  simony 
and  the  haughty  pride  of  priests  over  the  people?  Whence 
their  adulterous  lives?  Whence  wars  and  priestly  cursings 
and  quarrels  among  popes,  bishops,  and  priests?  The  dogs 
snap  at  and  bite  one  another  because  of  the  bone.  Take  the 
bone  away  and  they  will  cease  fighting.  All  this  comes  from 
the  poisonous  love  of  money,  the  unrighteous  mammon  con- 
demned by  Christ."^ 

In  the  first  of  his  sermons  before  the  synod,  on  John  15  :  27,2 
he  cited  as  personal  qualities  of  true  bishops  and  priests,  hu- 
mility, chastity  and  poverty.  ''There  are  many  of  you," 
he  said,  "who  by  wine-drinking  and  drunkenness  are  much 
more  tainted  than  laymen.  As  laymen  walk  with  their  canes 
to  the  churches,  so  these  clerics  go  to  the  beer-hall  with  canes, 
and  when  they  return  they  can  hardly  walk,  much  less  talk, 
and,  least  of  all,  do  they  know  what  is  demanded  of  the 
priestly  office.  The  richer  among  them  go  to  entertainments 
provided  out  of  the  charitable  funds,  where  food  and  drink 
are  served,  more  abundant  in  quantity  and  more  rich  and 
dainty  than  citizens  and  even  nobles  are  accustomed  to 
have,  and  where  Christ  with  his  passion  is  banned.  When 
the  blood  becomes  heated,  they  talk  of  women  and  acts  of 
lust  in  most  wanton  language.  They  fail  to  attend  vespers 
or  cut  the  vesper  service  short,  and  even  during  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  mass  they  do  not  cease  to  walk  to  and  fro  in  the 
church  and  pass  unbecoming  and  unchaste  remarks.  They 
ought  like  dogs  to  be  turned  out  of  the  house  of  God,  where 
they  give  such  reproach  and  scandal  to  the  hearts  of  simple 
laymen." 

Huss  might  have  reminded  his  hearers  that  even  a  former 
archbishop  of  Prague,  John  of  Jenzenstein,  attended  balls  but, 
moved  by  a  large  loss  of  life  which  occurred  in  an  accident 
at  one  of  them,  he  turned  to  acts  of  penance.^ 

'  Langsdorff,  2,  24.  -  Monti menta,  2  :  35  sqq. 

^  Palacky,  Gesch.,  34.     Jenstein  resigned  in  favor  of  his  nephew,  1386. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  63 

As  for  poverty,  he  spoke,  as  he  said,  what  he  knew  when 
he  declared  that  there  "were  among  the  priests  hawkers  and 
hucksters  who  sold  horses,  wine,  and  other  goods  and  at 
higher  prices  than  the  usual  layman  did  and  were  moved  by 
greater  cupidity.  To  gather  moneys  for  palatial  churches, 
dedicated  to  saints  and  all  too  ornate,  festivals  were  held  and 
pilgrimages  instituted  as  if  the  very  festivals  of  the  Apostles 
were  being  celebrated,  and  at  these,  as  it  is  said,  the  purses  of 
the  poor  are  emptied  more  by  lies  than  by  humble  entreaties. 
Prelates  should  be  told  that  at  one  lie,  which  is  deserving  of 
damnation,  God  takes  more  offense  than  He  is  pleased  by  the 
erection  of  a  large  church,  even  though  it  be  built  of  gold." 

In  the  last  synodal  sermon,  preached  1407,  on  Eph.  6  :  14,^ 
"Having  your  loins  girt  about  with  truth  and  having  on  the 
helmet  of  salvation,"  he  urged  the  clergy  to  be  at  the  fore- 
front of  the  spiritual  battle,  popes,  cardinals,  patriarchs,  arch- 
bishops, bishops,  abbots,  archdeacons,  as  well  as  simple 
priests  and  friars.  He  adduced  as  heretics  the  sons  of  Eli 
who  forgot  the  duties  of  their  priestly  office.  With  the  aid  of 
quotations  from  Bernard,  Augustine,  Matthias  of  Janow  and 
others,  and  texts  of  Scripture  he  assailed  the  vices  of  the 
clergy — neglect  and  sacrilege,  cupidity  and  plural  livings. 
He  condemned  "the  quest  for  money  by  the  offer  of  special 
indulgences,  spurious  reUcs,  and  garish  pictures.  In  these 
ways  and  in  others,  by  playing  upon  the  fears  and  ignorance 
of  the  people,  they  minister  to  their  own  self-indulgence  and 
ease.  Of  all  heretics,  the  simonist  who  traffics  in  holy  things 
is  the  worst.  More  tolerable  than  such  heresy  is  the  heresy 
of  Macedonius  and  the  Pneumatichoi.  For  these  continue 
to  recognize  the  Holy  Ghost  as  a  creature  and  a  servant  of 
God,  the  Father  and  the  Son.  But  the  simonist  makes  the 
Holy  Ghost  his  own  personal  servant  by  trafficking  in  spiritual 
things.  May  they  shrink  back  from  their  wickedness  who 
imitate  Jeroboam  in  selling  the  priesthood  and  consecrate 
'  Monumenla,  2  :  47  sqq. 


64  JOHN  HUSS 

men  priests  no  matter  how  wicked  their  lives  may  be.  May 
they  shrink  back  lest  they  get  the  leprosy  of  Gehazi,  who  took 
pay  for  dispensing  God's  grace.  May  they  shrink  back  who 
follow  Judas  Iscariot,  who  bartered  away  what  was  holy  and 
for  whom  Christ  said  it  had  been  better  if  he  had  not  been 
born." 

The  popular  strength  of  the  movement  in  the  direction  of 
the  reform  of  church  abuses  found  hopeful  expression  in  the 
archbishop's  act  appointing  a  commission,  of  which  Huss  was 
a  member,  to  investigate  the  alleged  miraculous  qualities  of 
the  holy  blood  of  Christ,  exhibited  at  Wylsnack.  Wylsnack 
was  a  town  in  Brandenburg,  northwest  of  Berhn.  The  relic 
was  first  shown  in  1383  and  attracted  throngs  of  pilgrims  from 
Bohemia,  Hungary,  and  other  parts  of  Europe.  In  its  day  it 
was  probably  the  most  famous  object  of  devotion  in  Central 
Europe.  Among  the  more  notable  miracles  ascribed  to  its 
agency  was  the  success  given  to  a  knight  who,  after  having 
vowed  to  devote  his  armor  to  the  holy  blood,  killed  his  op- 
ponent, Frederick,  in  a  duel.  Another  much-talked-of  case 
was  that  of  a  certain  robber,  Peter,  who  was  imprisoned  for  his 
crimes.  Making  a  vow  to  the  relic,  he  was  able  to  break  his 
fetters  and  escape  the  prison  walls.  The  case  which  attracted 
most  attention  in  Bohemia  and  probably  precipitated  the 
archbishop's  investigation  was  the  case  of  Peter  of  Cachy. 
This  citizen  of  Prague  had  a  withered  hand  and,  going  to 
Wylsnack,  carried  with  him  a  silver  duplicate,  which  he  laid 
on  the  altar  as  the  price  of  the  hoped-for  cure.  His  hope  was 
not  realized,  but  to  his  amazement  a  priest  announced  in  the 
church,  when  Peter  happened  to  be  present,  that  a  miracle 
had  been  done  and  the  Praguer's  hand  healed.  Lifting  up 
his  infirm  arm,  Peter  cried  out:  "0  priest,  what  a  Har  thou 
art!  See  my  hand  is  still  as  much  withered  as  it  was  be- 
fore." 

The  commission,  which  included,  besides  Huss,  Stanis- 
laus of  Znaim  and  probably  Palecz,  reported  that  the  relic 


HUSS   AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  65 

was  a  fraud  and  the  archbishop  followed  up  the  report  with  a 
decree  forbidding  all  pilgrimages  to  Wylsnack.^ 

The  investigation  was  followed  by  a  heated  discussion  in 
the  university  as  to  whether  all  of  Christ's  blood  was  glorified 
or  not.  And  for  the  moment  it  seemed  as  if  this  question 
had  obscured  the  importance  of  all  other  theological  debate 
and  efifort  at  church  reform  in  the  city.  It  called  forth  from 
Huss's  pen  a  treatise  entitled  The  Blood  of  Christ — de  sanguine 
Christie 

Here  the  author  states  the  claim  made  for  the  miraculous 
relic  justified  the  archbishop  who  had  acted  "as  a  true  shep- 
herd" in  ordering  the  investigation,  and  makes  an  argument 
to  prove  the  liquid  a  fraud.  The  argument  is  based  upon 
Scripture,  the  authority  of  the  church,  and  reason.  For  the 
statement  that  the  entire  body  of  Christ — hair,  beard,  and 
blood,  yea,  all  the  parts  of  Christ's  earthly  body — are  glori- 
fied and  no  one  of  them  exists  on  the  earth,  he  adduced  such 
Scripture  texts  as  I  Cor.  15  :  19,  ''It  is  sown  a  natural  body 
and  raised  a  spiritual  body,"  and  Luke  21  :  18,  ''Not  a  hair  of 
your  head  shall  perish,"  as  also  the  words  revealed  to  David, 
"Thou  shalt  not  suflfer  thy  Holy  One  to  see  corruption," 
Psalms  16  :  ID.  In  regard  to  the  red  spots  shown  on  gar- 
ments alleged  to  have  been  worn  by  the  Virgin  and  on  the 
cross  and  thorns  from  Christ's  crown,  these  were  only  an  ap- 
pearance; the  substance  was  not  there.  Christ's  foreskin, 
which  was  reported  to  be  in  Rome,  was  not  genuine,  in  spite 
of  the  fact  that  the  number  deceived  thereby  was  large.  Like- 
wise Christ's  beard  and  the  milk  from  Mary's  breast,  shown 
in  Prague,  were  frauds,  even  though  the  worshippers  believing 
them  genuine  were  many.    It  was  fitting  that  none  of  Christ's 

^  Dociimenta,  332. 

^  Monumenta,  i  :  191-202.  Flajshans  ed.,  pp.  xvi,  39,  with  literature  in 
Introduction.  Flajshans,  p.  xvi,  pronounces  the  value  of  the  tract  historical 
and  not  dogmatic,  inasmuch  as  the  Catholics  deny  Huss's  conclusion  as  to 
relics  of  Christ,  because  Huss  left  out  one  of  the  considerations  advanced  by 
Thomas  Aquinas;  and  Protestants,  on  the  other  hand,  do  not  find  enough  refer- 
ences to  Scripture  or  else  find  the  Scripture  texts  inapposite. 


66  JOHN  HUSS 

blood  be  annihilated  or  putrefied  and  that  all  the  blood  which 
he  shed  be  glorified  with  his  body. 

The  second  argument  proved  that  the  alleged  miracles 
performed  at  Wylsnack  were  deceptions  upon  the  basis  of  the 
testimony  of  persons  reported  to  have  been  cured.  The  relic 
was  said  to  have  restored  sight  to  the  blind  and  to  have  helped 
the  prisoner  to  escape  from  jail.  But  the  commission  dis- 
covered that  two  women,  who  were  reported  to  have  received 
their  sight,  swore  before  a  notary  that  they  had  never  been 
blind,  and  a  boy,  reported  as  having  had  a  foot  healed,  was 
worse  off  after  his  visit  to  Wylsnack  than  he  was  when  he  went 
there. 

In  spite  of  the  commission's  report,  Huss's  tract  and 
Zbynek's  decree,  the  relic  continued,  doing  its  mission  of  de- 
ceiving the  unwary  for  more  than  a  century.  But  the  dis- 
cussion, started  in  the  university  over  the  question  whether 
any  of  Christ's  blood  is  on  the  earth,  excited  interest  beyond 
Prague.  It  was  made  the  subject  of  discussion  in  the  uni- 
versity of  Vienna,  received  special  notice  in  the  universities 
of  Leipzig  and  Erfurt,  and  a  synod  held  in  Magdeburg,  141 2, 
called  upon  the  bishop  of  Havelberg,  in  whose  diocese  Wyls- 
nack was  located,  to  put  an  end  to  the  deception.  Huss  de- 
clared that  at  Wylsnack  they  did  not  know  what  they  adored, 
but  that  "we  adore  Christ's  body  and  blood,  extant  at  the 
right  hand  of  God  and  hidden  in  the  venerable  sacrament." 
Wylsnack  was  still  a  place  of  pilgrimage  in  Luther's  day,  as 
Luther  tells  us  in  his  Address  to  the  German  Nobility.  In 
1552  the  pyx  was  broken  in  which  the  relic  was  held  and  the 
relic  itself  thrown  into  the  fire. 

The  most  notable  case  of  Christ's  blood  was  the  relic 
which  reached  England  in  1247.  Its  arrival  was  celebrated 
with  distinguished  solemnity.  The  king  of  England,  Henry 
III,  after  fasting  and  keeping  watch  all  night,  accompanied 
by  the  priests  of  London  in  full  canonicals  and  with  tapers 
burning,  carried  the  vase  containing  the  holy  liquid  from  St. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  67 

Paul's  to  Westminster,  and  around  the  church  and  the  palace. 
The  king,  bareheaded,  proceeded  on  foot,  holding  the  sacred 
relic  above  his  head.  The  bishop  of  Norwich  preached  the 
sermon  on  the  occasion  and,  at  a  later  date,  Robert  Grosse- 
teste  preached  another,  defending  the  genuineness  of  the  blood 
by  reasoning  which  displayed  great  scholastic  ingenuity. 
Matthew  Paris,  who  gives  a  detailed  description  of  the  relic, 
called  it  "a,  holy  benefit  from  heaven."^ 

Among  the  cases  of  bloody  hosts  was  the  one  reported  by 
Caesar  of  Heisterbach  two  centuries  earlier  at  St.  Trond, 
Belgium.  He  had" seen  it  himself  and  spoke  of  it  as  a  miracle 
to  be  recorded  for  the  benefit  of  the  generations  that  were 
to  come  after.  The  fragments  of  the  cross,  which  the  piety 
of  the  Middle  Ages  revered  as  genuine,  came  to  be  so  numerous 
that  Clement  V  solemnly  proclaimed  the  dogma  of  the  mul- 
tiplication of  the  wood  of  the  sacred  tree. 

The  decision  issued  against  the  use  of  Wyclif's  writings 
by  the  university  of  Prague,  in  1403,  had  the  result  of  in- 
creasing the  curiosity  to  know  what  Wyclif's  views  were. 
In  fact,  clerical  and  scholarly  opinion  in  Prague  was  in  a  fer- 


'  Among  the  most  notable  collections  of  relics  it  has  been  my  privilege  to 
see  was  the  collection  shown  by  the  cathedral  of  Aachen  in  September,  1909. 
It  is  exhibited  every  seven  years.  I  was  told  that  the  day  before  my  visit 
11,000  people  had  paid  their  mark  for  admission  in  addition  to  the  poor,  who 
are  admitted  without  fee.  Hanging  up  against  the  wall  of  the  passageway 
through  which  we  passed  were  notices,  "  Beware  of  pickpockets,"  so  that  the 
ancient  relics  of  Stephen,  part  of  the  sponge  handed  to  Christ  on  the  cross,  two 
of  the  Apostle  Thomas's  teeth,  and  others  scarcely  less  remarkable,  displayed  a 
few  feet  away,  were  not  sufficient  to  ward  off  these  modern  sinners.  The  most 
notable  specimens  in  the  collection  are  the  four  greater  relics — the  undergarment 
which  Mary  wore  when  Christ  was  born,  Christ's  swaddling  clothes,  the  garment 
he  wore  around  his  loins  on  the  cross,  and  the  sheet  on  which  the  head  of  John 
the  Baptist  was  laid  after  he  was  put  to  death.  The  two  latter,  it  is  said, 
contain  blood-stains  but,  though  placed  where  the  material  was  seen,  were  not 
unfolded.  Mary's  garment  was  displayed  in  its  full  proportions  within  a  glass 
case,  at  either  end  of  which  a  priest  sat  who,  receiving  rosaries  intrusted  to 
him  by  worshippers,  thrust  them  inside  the  case  and,  touching  them  against 
the  sacred  garment,  returned  the  beads  to  the  owners.  Since  1200,  so  the 
official  account  of  the  cathedral  states,  the  septennial  exhibition  has  occurred 
and  the  pilgrimages  have  been  going  on. 


68  JOHN  HUSS 

ment  over  the  English  Schoolmen.  Zbynek  was  forced  into 
the  discussion  by  a  summons  from  Innocent  VII,  1405,  call- 
ing upon  him  to  extirpate  the  errors  of  WycHf  sown  in  his 
diocese.  The  papal  document  was  issued  in  answer  to  an 
appeal  which  reached  the  pope  from  Prague. 

A  synod,  convened  in  1406,  reaffirmed  the  action  taken  by 
the  university  three  years  before  and  threatened  with  the 
penalty  of  excommunication  all  who  denied  that  the  bread 
and  wine  after  the  consecration  were  the  real  body  and  blood 
of  Christ.^  A  number  of  laymen  as  well  as  clerics  were  cited 
before  the  archbishop's  court  charged  with  holding  the  Eng- 
lishman's view,  but  were  dismissed — an  issue  largely  due  to 
Huss's  presence. 

The  same  year  a  document  reached  Prague  bearing  the 
seal  of  Oxford  university  and  purporting  to  have  been  is- 
sued by  its  chancellor  and  its  masters.^  The  bearer,  Nicholas 
Faulfisch,  also  had  with  him  a  piece  of  Wyclif's  tombstone 
which  he  had  broken  off  at  Lutterworth.  The  document 
attested  the  excellency  of  Wyclif's  life,  the  profundity  of  his 
teachings,  and  the  sweetness  of  his  memory  as  matters  known 
to  all.  He  knew  how  to  study  the  best  interests  of  the  church. 
His  conversation  to  the  day  of  his  death  was  so  excellent  and 
pure  that  it  exposed  not  a  single  dark  corner  to  suspicion. 
In  his  lectures,  preaching,  and  discussions  he  was  a  strong 
defender  of  the  faith,  and,  as  a  writer  on  all  subjects  philoso- 
phical, theological  and  practical,  he  disposed  of  by  considera- 
tions drawn  from  Scripture  and  in  a  cathoHc  manner  all  who 
blasphemed  Christ's  religion;  Oxford  had  not  had  his  equal. 
Nor  was  he  convicted  of  heretical  depravity,  nor  was  his 
body  given  over  to  the  flames.  Far  be  it  from  our  prelates 
that  they  should  have  condemned  a  man  of  such  probity  as  a 
heretic. 

1  Palacky,  Gesck.,  213.     Note,  quoting  the  Chron.  Univ.  Prag.  Doc,  332-5, 
for  the  synodal  acts. 
'  Monumenta,  2  :  542. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  69 

This  eulogy  fanned  the  flames  of  controversy  in  Prague. 
Already  Bohemia  had  got  the  ill  fame  of  being  heretical 
on  account  of  the  prevalence  of  "Wyclifites  and  errorists" 
within  its  borders.^  The  Bohemian  element  at  the  univer- 
sity, if  not  exclusively  concerned  about  Wyclifism,  was  far 
more  concerned  about  it  than  all  other  elements  combined. 
This  element,  or  "nation,"  officially  took  up  the  matter  May 
20,  1408,  in  an  assembly  consisting  of  sixty-four  doctors  and 
masters,  one  hundred  and  fifty  bachelors,  and  nearly  one 
thousand  students.^  Among  the  professors  were  Peter  and 
Stanislaus  Znaim,  Stephen  Palecz,  Jacob  of  Mies,  and  Huss. 
Huss  protested  against  the  unconditional  condemnation  of 
the  XLV  Articles  and  the  assembly  went  so  far  as  to  modify 
the  decree  issued  by  the  whole  university  in  1403  and  con- 
tented itself  with  ordering  that  the  articles  should  not  be 
taught  in  a  way  to  give  a  heretical  or  erroneous  sense.  Fur- 
ther, it  was  agreed  that  Wyclif's  statements  should  not  be 
taken  up  at  public  disputations  and  that  bachelors  of  the- 
ology should  avoid  lecturing  on  Wyclif's  three  tractates,  the 
Dialogus,  Trialogus  and  de  Eucharistia. 

Immediately  before  as  well  as  after  this  convention, 
clergymen,  including  Nicholas  Welemowicz  and  Master  Mat- 
thias of  Knin,  were  indicted  before  the  tribunal  of  the  inquisi- 
tion in  Prague,  at  the  head  of  which  stood  the  Franciscan, 
Jaroslov,  titular  bishop  of  Sarepta.  This  tribunal  had  been 
estabhshed  in  the  city  in  13 15,  and  early  in  its  history  put  to 
death  in  a  single  year  fourteen  Beghards.^  Welemowicz, 
called  Abraham,  was  charged  with  being  a  Waldensian.  He 
declared  laymen  might  preach  as  well  as  priests.  When  bid- 
den to  take  the  oath  upon  the  Gospels  and  the  crucifix,  Huss, 
who  defended  him,  quoted  Chrysostom  to  show  that  an  oath 
is  not  to  be  required  by  any  created  thing  but  only  by  God. 

^Doc,  154,  2,zz,  etc. 

*  For  the  numbers,  see  Palacky,  Gesch.,  221  sq. 

'  Wetzer-Welte,  10  :  287. 


70  JOHN  HUSS 

The  vicar-general,  Kbel,  turning  upon  him,  exclaimed  with 
passion  that  he  was  there  not  to  argue  but  as  a  spectator.^ 
Huss  complained  that  wicked  and  incestuous  priests  were 
left  untouched  while  some  of  the  best  were  being  indicted. 
In  spite  of  Huss's  intercession,  the  accused  was  kept  in  prison 
and  later  banished  by  the  archbishop. 

Pressed  by  a  summons  from  Gregory  XII,  May  15,  1408, 
and  at  the  king's  instance,  the  archbishop  instituted  "a 
diligent  and  searching  investigation"  in  his  diocese  for  proof 
whether  Bohemia  was  Wyclifite  and  heretical  or  not.  The  re- 
sult was  such  that  at  a  general  synod  made  up  of  the  clergy 
and  the  constituency  of  the  university,  held  two  months 
later,  July  17,  1408,  the  archbishop  felt  justified  in  announc- 
ing that  not  a  single  person  could  be  found  in  the  diocese  of 
Prague  holding  heresy  or  addicted  to  error,  and  he  informed  the 
pope  that  Bohemia  was  true  to  the  Catholic  faith  all  through.^ 

So  prominently  identified  was  Huss  with  the  new  doc- 
trines, that  his  attitude  called  forth  from  certain  of  the  clergy 
in  1408  an  indictment  against  him  addressed  to  the  archbishop. 
The  charges  were  that  in  the  Bethlehem  chapel,  before  a  large 
audience  made  up  of  men  and  women,  he  had  declared,  at 
variance  with  the  teaching  of  the  Fathers,  that  it  was  a  sin 
for  the  priests  to  take  money  for  burials  and  celebrating  the 
sacraments.  He  made  the  clergy  odious  in  the  sight  of  the 
people  by  announcing  that  he  wished  his  soul  to  be  where  the 
soul  of  Wyclif  was — vellet  animam  suam  ihi  fore  ubi  est  anima 
Wyclef^ — and  following  Wyclif  he  held  to  the  remanence  of 
f  the  bread  and  wine  after  the  words  of  institution.  While  he 
was  dining  with  the  rector  of  St.  Clement's  he  had  struck 
the  table  with  his  fist  and  exclaimed:  "What  is  the  Roman 
church?  There  antichrist  has  planted  his  foot."  He  was 
also  charged  with  preaching  often  and  abusively  against 
the  clergy  so  as  to  bring  it  into  disrepute  with  the  people  as 
it  had  never  before  been  up  to  that  time.    It  is  possible  that 

^  Doc,  184  sq.  ^  Mon.,  i  :  109-114.  ^  Doc,  153  sqq.,  173-184. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  71 

Huss  had  been  indiscreet  in  his  language  of  detraction  and 
too  sweeping  in  his  accusations,  but  the  central  charge,  upon 
which  it  was  hoped  to  make  out  the  case  against  him  and 
forever  discredit  him,  was  the  charge  of  WycUfry. 

In  his  Reply  to  these  accusations,  Huss  afiEirmed  that  he 
had  said  that  the  priest  has  no  right  to  demand  fixed  fees 
for  spiritual  ministries  and  that  this  position  was  in  agree- 
ment with  canon  law.  Whatever  was  given  was  to  have  the 
quahty  of  a  voluntary  gift.  Simony  was  condemned  in  the 
persons  of  Gehazi  and  Simon  Magus.  When  he  asserted 
he  would  be  glad  to  be  where  Wyclif  was,  he  was  expressing  a 
hope — vellem  esse  in  spe  uhi  est  anima  Wycleff—"  for  every 
man,"  he  said,  "so  far  as  I  know,  who  is  not  condemned  by 
Scripture  and  revelation,  will  be  much  higher  than  I  myself  at 
the  last  day,  and  I  much  fear  lest  Christ,  when  he  calleth 
such  an  person  and  myself  say,  to  me  '  Give  him  room '  and  I 
begin  with  confusion  to  take  the  lower  place.  For,  whom 
neither  Scripture  nor  the  church  by  revelation  pronounce 
damned,  I  dare  not  condemn,  for  the  truth  says:  'Judge  not 
that  ye  be  not  judged.'  The  argument  is  fooHsh  and  against 
Christ's  law  which  runs:  'He  asserted  heresy,  therefore  is  he 
condemned.'  Similarly  we  might  say:  'He  was  a  Jew,  a 
pagan,  a  usurer,  or  a  publican,  therefore  is  he  damned.'  It 
is  foolish  for  the  reason  that  the  dying  thief  heard  from 
Christ  the  words:  'This  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Para- 
dise.' The  judges  would  argue  well  if  they  argued  in  this  way, 
namely,  'such  and  such  a  man  affirmed  heresy  and  did  not  do 
penance;  hence  he  is  damned.'  " 

In  this  Reply,  Huss  did  not  distinctly  deny  the  remanence 
of  the  substance  of  the  elements  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  but 
seemed  to  evade  the  question  by  calling  upon  the  archbishop 
to  bid  his  adversaries  take  note  of  the  archbishop's  official 
announcement  that,  after  a  diligent  investigation,  no  man 
had  been  found  "who  erred  on  the  subject  of  the  venerable 
sacrament."    When  this  charge  was  repeated  in  1414,  Huss 


72  JOHN  HUSS 

absolutely  denied  it,  declaring  that  he  had  constantly  affirmed 
that  what  the  people  saw  at  the  elevation  of  the  host  in  the 
form  of  bread  and  wine  was  the  body  of  Christ,  and  this  they 
saw  by  faith. 

As  for  the  charge  of  extravagance  in  dwelling  upon  the 
lives  of  the  clergy,  he  quoted  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
to  show  that  he  had  followed  the  examples  set  forth  therein. 
The  Master  had  exposed  the  sins  of  both  people  and  clergy, 
and,  instead  of  flattering  the  Pharisees  and  scribes,  called  them 
a  wicked  generation  and  pronounced  the  devil  their  father. 
Huss's  Reply,  which  was  elaborate,  is  written  in  a  spirit  of 
strong  assurance. 

The  advocacy  of  the  new  views  was  not  confined  to  ser- 
mons and  tracts  and  university  discussions.  As  the  Flagellants 
and  the  Lollards  had  their  popular  songs,  so  at  Prague  at  this 
time  a  new  hymnody  came  into  being  and  popular  songs  were 
sung  embodying  views  expressing  the  religious  sentiment  of 
the  people,  but  also  ridiculing  the  bishops  and  the  inquisitorial 
party.  All  of  them,  with  the  exception  of  four,  were  forbidden 
to  be  sung  by  the  archbishop.^ 

The  next  step  on  the  archbishop's  part  was  to  prevent 
the  working  of  Wyclifite  infection  by  destroying  all  copies  of 
Wyclif's  writings.  The  action  of  the  university  and  Huss's 
attitude  toward  Wyclif  indicated  plainly  enough  that  Wyclifite 
teachings  were  current.  Huss's  Reply  did  not  satisfy  the 
conservative  wing  of  the  clergy.  They  followed  him  in  his 
walks  and  attended  his  chapel  to  catch  heretical  sentences 
and  to  put  them  down  for  use  against  him.  Nothing  but 
the  complete  humihation  of  the  Bethlehem  preacher  would 
satisfy  some  of  these  sleepless  guardians  of  the  truth  and 
orthodox  teachings.  Zbynek  had  to  choose  between  this 
wing  and  the  popular  preacher,  and  in  choosing  the  latter  he 
would  risk  the  censure  of  his  superior,  the  pope.  The  con- 
ditions forced  him  to  become  a  Wyclifist  himself  and  jeopar- 

*  Documenla,  t,2,2,. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  73 

dize  his  own  good  standing  or  to  treat  Huss  with  suspicion 
and  deal  with  him  according  to  the  strict  usage  of  the  church. 
The  air  was  filled  with  disturbing  rumors,  but  it  was  evi- 
dently not  without  much  reluctance  that  the  archbishop  took 
the  latter  attitude.  In  the  settlement  of  the  issue,  the  king 
and  the  members  of  his  court  were  to  be  involved.  The  peo- 
ple were  predominantly  with  Huss,  as  were  also  many  of  the 
clergy.  The  queen  had  made  him  her  confessor  and,  in  com- 
pany with  the  ladies  of  her  suite,  attended  Bethlehem 
chapel.  The  king's  sympathies  also  seemed  to  lean  in  that 
direction,  but  policy  made  it  expedient  for  him  to  preserve 
the  pope's  favor  and  to  prevent,  if  possible,  the  appearance 
of  any  division  among  his  people  on  religious  questions. 

The  situation  in  Prague  was  unexpectedly  complicated  by 
two  contemporary  events,  the  settlement  of  the  papal  schism 
and  a  change  in  the  constitution  of  the  university  of  the  city. 

The  scandal  of  the  rent  in  Christendom  with  two  con- 
tending popes,  one  at  Avignon  and  one  at  Rome,  was  drawing 
to  a  close.  It  had  now  continued  for  thirty  years.  The  last 
popes  in  each  line — Angelo  Correr,  cardinal  of  Venice,  known 
as  Gregory  XII,  elected  1406,  and  Peter  de  Luna,  known  as 
Benedict  XIII,  elected  1394 — were  men  of  ability  and  te- 
nacious of  power,  each  equally  convinced  of  the  justice  of  his 
claims.  Both  of  them  uttered  the  most  pious  laments  over 
the  rift  in  the  Christian  world  of  the  West  and  the  evils  of 
the  double  papacy.  Both  pontiffs  called  themselves  ''servant 
of  the  servants  of  God."  It  was  a  serious  crisis.  Not  only 
the  university  of  Paris,  but  individuals  all  over  Europe  had 
worked  in  the  interest  of  its  solution.  The  pontiffs  professed 
to  be  ready  to  do  almost  anything  to  bring  the  division  to  an 
end — everything  except  resign,  and  thus  open  the  way  for  an- 
other election,  or  submit  their  claims  to  an  impartial  umpire. 

Gregory  wrote  to  his  rival  on  the  Rhone  that,  Hke  the 
woman  who  was  ready  to  renounce  her  child  rather  than  see 
it  cut  asunder,  each  of  them  should  be  willing  to  cede  his 


74  JOHN  HUSS 

authority  rather  than  be  responsible  for  a  continuance  of 
schism.  He  quoted  the  words:  "Whosoever  abaseth  himself 
shall  be  exalted  and  whoso  exalteth  himself  shall  be  brought 
low."  Benedict  replied,  pronouncing  the  schism  abominable, 
detestable,  dreadful — execranda,  detestanda,  diraque  divisio. 
Gregory  announced  himself  as  passionately  in  favor  of  uni- 
fication, so  passionately  that  he  was  willing  to  cross  by  land 
or  by  sea — by  land  with  a  pilgrim's  staff,  or  by  sea  in  a  fishing- 
smack — to  meet  Benedict  and  to  arrange  for  union.  "Time 
is  short.  We  are  both  old  men,"  wrote  back  Benedict.  "Has- 
ten and  do  not  delay  in  this  good  cause.  Let  us  both  embrace 
the  ways  of  salvation  and  peace."  Nothing  could  have  been 
finer;  the  sentiments  were  beyond  praise,  the  language  was 
pathetic.  The  one  lamented  that  the  division  was  pitiable, 
the  other  that  it  was  most  destructive.  Had  they  proved  by 
act  the  sincerity  of  their  words  they  both  would  have  deserved 
canonization.  The  Catholic  historian,  Pastor,  has  said  that 
none  of  the  popes  were  big  enough  of  soul  to  put  an  end  to  the 
schism. 

It  remained  for  thirteen  cardinals,  forsaking  the  two 
obediences,  to  take  the  first  practical  step  leading  to  the 
desired  reunion.  They  met  at  Livorno  and  called  the  oecu- 
menical synod,  which  convened  at  Pisa,  1409,  for  the  purpose 
of  heahng  the  schism  and,  as  the  formula  ran,  reforming  the 
church  "in  head  and  members,"  which  meant  from  the  papal 
chair  down. 

The  king  of  Bohemia,  Wenzel,  following  his  father,  Charles 
IV,  had  consistently  acknowledged  the  obedience  of  the 
Roman  line  and  maintained  his  loyalty  to  it  in  spite  of  the 
attempts  made  by  Clement  VII  to  win  Charles  to  the  Avig- 
non obedience.  The  call  of  the  Pisan  council  gave  a  well- 
grounded  hope  for  a  settlement  of  the  papal  question,  and 
Wenzel  withdrew  from  the  obedience  of  Gregory  XII  to  as-^ 
sume  a  neutral  attitude.  The  king  called  upon  the  univer-jj 
sity  of  Prague  and  the  clergy  to  decide  for  neutrality.     In 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  75 

doing  so,  they  would  be  imitating  the  action  of  the  clergy  of 
France.  Zbynek  resisted  the  king's  wishes  and  continued  for 
the  time  being  to  acknowledge  Gregory.  Following  the  ad- 
vice of  its  rector,  Henning  of  Baltenhagen,  the  university 
decided  not  to  proceed  to  a  vote  on  the  question,  for  it  was 
found  that  the  Bohemian  student  body  or  nation  supported 
the  king,  and  the  three  other  nations  were  opposed  to  the 
proposition  to  adopt  an  attitude  of  neutrality.  This  diver- 
gence of  view  constituted  a  new  element  in  the  controversy 
between  Huss  and  the  church  authorities  by  drawing  the/i 
court  into  sympathy  with  him  and  developing  the  breach  with 
the  archbishop. 

The  cleft  between  the  king  and  the  archbishop  was  widened 
by  the  king's  order,*  January  22,  1409,  forbidding  his  subjects 
to  render  obedience  to  Gregory  XII.  The  cardinals  he  ad- 
dressed as  "our  most  dear  friends,  zealous  for  peace  and  the 
universal  church  of  the  most  true  God."  He  also  forbade 
the  Bohemian  clergy  to  receive  briefs  from  Gregory  until 
the  council  had  rendered  its  decision.  He  sent  a  delegation 
to  the  cardinals,  which  included  Palecz  and  Stanislaus  of 
Znaim,  both  of  whom  were  seized  by  Balthasar  Cossa,  the 
cardinal  of  Bologna,  afterward  John  XXIII.  Balthasar  re- 
leased them  from  prison  only  after  urgent  protests  from  the 
university  of  Prague  and  the  cardinals.^  It  has  been  surmised 
that  Balthasar's  pretext  was  the  supposed  WycHfite  leanings 
of  these  two  men,  but  the  release  was  not  procured  without 
the  payment  of  money.  The  king's  withdrawal  from  the 
obedience  of  Gregory  XII  was  no  doubt  due  in  part  to  that 
pontiflf's  reluctance  to  crown  Wenzel  emperor.  He  was  hop- 
ing that  the  council  would  provide  for  his  recognition  as 
against  his  rival,  Ruprecht. 

At  the  death  of  his  father,  Charles  IV,  Wenzel,  who  was 
only  fifteen  at  the  time,  received  as  his  dominion  Bohemia, 
Silesia  and  parts  of  Bavaria  and  Saxony.     He  proved  to  be  a 

*  Doc,  348  sqq.  *  See  the  letters,  Doc,  345  sq.,  363  sq. 


76  JOHN  HUSS 

vacillating  prince,  given  to  pleasure  and  debauchery.  His 
lack  of  decision  and  habitual  indolence  won  for  him  the  title 
"the  Lazy."  In  1395  he  parted  with  the  dukedom  of  Milan 
and  other  possessions  in  Lombardy  to  the  Visconti  for  one 
hundred  thousand  florins,  and  in  a  fit  of  drunkenness  at 
Rheims  ceded  Genoa  to  France.  He  had  a  passion  for  hunt- 
ing-dogs.    His  first  wife,  Joanna,  so  it  was  rumored,  died, 

1386,  from  the  bite  of  a  monster  dog  which  the  king  kept  in 
his  bedroom  and  which  flew  at  her  throat  as  she  arose  one 
night  from  bed.  His  second  wife,  Sophia,  a  Bavarian  prin- 
cess, was  faithful  and  devoted  to  her  husband  in  all  his  changes 
of  fortune.^  Wenzel  had  a  stormy  reign.  It  was  a  series  of 
conflicts  between  him  and  his  barons  and  him  and  Sigismund, 
his  brother,  who  had  been  endowed  by  Charles  with  Branden- 
burg, and  through  marriage  obtained  the  crown  of  Hungary, 

1387.  He  held  the  Hungarian  crown  for  more  than  half  a 
century. 

More  than  once  Wenzel  was  seized  by  a  faction  of  his 
nobles,  who  resented  the  favorites  through  whom  he  ruled. 
On  one  occasion  he  was  released  by  his  youngest  brother, 
John  of  Gorlitz,  who  died  at  the  age  of  twenty-five  in  1396. 
In  view  of  his  incapacity  Sigismund,  in  1396,  was  called  in  to 
his  help  as  vicar  of  the  kingdom,  to  which  by  Wenzel's  child- 
lessness and  later  by  pact  he  was  heir.  On  the  pretext  of  his 
neglect  of  the  empire  and  his  abuse  of  the  church,  Wenzel 
was  deposed  from  his  office  of  king  of  the  Romans  by  a 
majority  of  the  electors,  led  by  Count  John,  archbishop  of 
Mainz,  and  Ruprecht  was  elected  in  his  place,  1400.  Instead 
of  being  concerned  for  his  brother's  interests,  Sigismund  was 
continually  seeking  his  own  advantage,  and  in  1402  put 
Wenzel  under  the  guard  of  the  duke  of  Austria  at  Vienna. 
The  king  made  his  escape  from  prison,  again  won  the  support 

'  ^neas  Sylvius,  chap.  33,  says:  "Wenzel  was  most  unlike  his  father,  a 
follower  of  pleasures  and  avoiding  work."  Petrarch  calls  him  venator  robustus 
■ — a  hardy  hunter.  Of  Sophia  ^neas  says:  "She  was  by  far  the  superior  of 
her  husband." 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  77 

of  his  nobles  and  resumed  his  throne.  Later  amicable  relations 
were  restored,  and  in  141 1,  after  Ruprecht's  death  and  with 
Wenzel's  assent,  Sigismund  was  crowned  king  of  the  Romans. 

Personal  sympathies,  the  lukewarm  support  given  him  by 
Gregory  XII,  and  the  continued  devotion  of  Zbynek  to 
Gregory's  obedience,  all  these  considerations  were  adapted 
to  draw  the  king's  favor  to  Huss,  and  so  they  did.  The  dele- 
gation, sent  by  the  king,  appeared  at  Pisa,  March,  1409,  and 
announced  the  king's  allegiance  to  the  pope  elected  by  the 
council,  Alexander  V.  On  the  other  hand,  Zbynek  remained 
true  to  Gregory  until  September,  1409,  when  he,  too,  trans- 
ferred his  allegiance  to  Alexander.  The  Pisan  council,  re- 
garded as  oecumenical  by  Gerson  and  Bossuet  and  so  declared 
by  the  council  of  Constance,  has  in  these  latter  days  fallen 
under  the  universal  condemnation  of  Catholic  historians. 
Hergenrother-Kirsch  in  a  tone  of  irony  calls  it  the  "unblessed 
Pisan  synod" — segenlose  Pisaner  Synode.  And  Pastor  pro- 
nounces it  the  "essentially  revolutionary  convention" — we- 
sentlich  revolutiondre  Versammlung. 

When  Huss  announced  himself  fully  on  the  side  of  the 
king  in  the  matter  of  papal  allegiance,  the  archbishop  turned 
against  him.  He  himself,  as  he  wrote  to  the  college  of  car- 
dinals, had  urged  the  duty  of  loyalty  to  it.  The  archbishop 
inhibited  him  from  exercising  priestly  functions  and  preach- 
ing. In  his  remonstrance,  Huss  expressed  his  pain  that  for 
the  first  time  the  archbishop  should  feel  called  upon  to  pro- 
nounce him  disobedient,  but  at  the  same  time  he  reaffirmed  his 
allegiance  to  the  Pisan  council,  and  to  the  archbishop's  author- 
ity, so  far  as  it  was  lawful.  He  also  replied  that  he  had  not 
censured  the  clergy,  but  had  rebuked  their  vices  and  their 
failure  to  serve  the  people.^  Huss  intimates  that  his  attitude 
of  neutrality  was  construed  by  Zbynek  as  though  it  had  been 
a  complete  renunciation  of  Gregory  XII,  which  he  denied. 
When  Zbynek  censured  Huss  he  also  censured  all  the  masters 

'  Doc,  5  sq.,  1 66  sq. 


78  JOHN  HUSS 

of  the  university  for  their  loyalty  to  the  council,  but  Huss 
was  the  only  one  singled  out  by  name.  He  was  the  foremost 
man  in  adopting  the  new  order  of  things.  This  condemnation 
by  Zbynek,  as  Huss  himself  wrote  to  the  cardinals,  141 1,  was 
the  starting-point  of  all  his  troubles.^ 

The  difference  of  opinion  within  the  faculties  and  student 
body  of  the  university  on  the  question  of  papal  obedience 
which  Wenzel's  demand  revealed  was  the  immediate  occasion 
of  a  revolutionary  change  in  its  charter.  By  this  change  the 
preponderance  of  power  in  the  government  of  the  institution 
was  taken  away  from  the  foreign  nations  and  transferred  to 
the  Czech  nation.  The  change  was  a  revolution  in  which 
Czech  patriotism  fought  for  the  mastery.  Here  again  Huss 
was  the  leading  figure.  The  troubles  which  followed  had  as 
their  result  to  identify  him  still  more  closely  with  the  Bo- 
hemian cause  and  also  with  the  court,  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  part  he  took  in  securing  a  change  of  the  charter  aroused 
the  embittered  hostihty  of  the  German  element  in  Prague. 

The  government  of  a  mediaeval  university,  such  as  Bologna 
and  Paris,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  body  of  professors  and 
students  who  were  grouped  in  ''nations,"  that  is,  the  aggrega- 
tion of  persons  coming  from  one  or  more  countries.  The 
system  was  recognized  at  Prague  from  the  beginning,  and  the 
rivalry  between  the  Bohemian  nation  and  the  three  foreign 
nations  had  been  of  long  standing.  Each  of  these  nations  had 
a  vote;  namely,  Bohemia,  including  Czechs,  Hungarians,  and 
Moravians;  Bavarfa,  including  Austrians,  Swabians,  Franco- 
nians,  and  dwellers  on  the  Rhine;  Poknd,  including  Poles, 
Lithuanians,  and  Russians;  and  Saxony,  including  Saxons, 
Swedes,  and  Danes.^  The  four  faculties  of  theology,  medi- 
cine, law  and  the  liberal  arts  were  at  first  under  a  single 
rector,  with  the  archbishop  of  Prague  as  chancellor,  the  arch- 

^  Doc,  21.  Moil.,  I  :  117.  Ecce  accusationis  mem  ac  gravaminis  exordium 
principale. 

-  See  Rashdall,  2:212.  Palacky,  Gesch.,  228  sqq.,  with  his  quotations  from 
the  Chron.  Univ.  Prag. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  79 

bishop  having  the  right  of  promotion  or  giving  degrees,  as  we 
would  say.  After  1400,  when  the  university  of  Cracow  was 
created,  the  Polish  students  withdrew  from  Prague  so  that 
the  constituency  of  the  university  of  Prague  was  narrowed 
down  to  students  who  spoke  Czech  and  those  who  spoke  Ger- 
man. The  Germans  had  three  votes,  the  Czechs  only  one, 
and  the  rivalry  between  these  elements  was  popularly  com- 
pared to  the  rivalry  between  the  Samaritans  and  Jews. 

In  the  city  of  Prague  the  German  population,  though  by 
no  means  so  numerous  as  the  Czech,  possessed  influence  out 
of  all  proportion  to  its  size.  The  city  records  were  kept  in 
German,  the  proceedings  in  the  council  chamber  were  car- 
ried on  in  the  same  language,  and  sixteen  out  of  the  eighteen 
members  of  the  council  were  Germans.^  There  was  German 
preaching  and  the  old  town  was  predominantly  German,  and 
this  element  was  striving  for  the  ascendancy  where  it  did  not 
already  possess  it.  As  for  the  university,  it  seemed  not  only 
just  that  it  should  be  ruled  by  Czechs  but  such  government 
came  to  be  identified  by  them  as  a  national  issue  and  as  one 
in  which  the  honor  of  their  language  was  at  stake.  As  Italian 
had  been  dignified  by  the  pens  of  Dante,  Petrarch,  and 
Boccaccio,  so  the  Bohemian  was  being  magnified  by  men  like 
Huss  and  Stitny. 

The  feeling  of  rivalry  between  the  two  races  was  in- 
creased by  the  conflict  over  the  German  throne.  Ruprecht's 
troops  had  entered  Bohemia  and  committed  great  depreda- 
tions. Huss  declared:  "Us  Bohemians  the  Germans  oppress, 
seizing  all  offices  of  state  while  we  are  silent.  According  to  all 
laws  of  God,  nature  and  the  propriety  of  things,  Bohemians 
in  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia  should  be  foremost  in  all  ofiices 
even  as  the  French  are  in  the  French  kingdom  and  the  Ger- 
mans in  German  lands."  Exalting  the  national  spirit,  he  ex- 
claimed: "The  Czechs  are  more  wretched  than  dogs  or  snakes, 

*  In  a  sermon  on  Matt.  13  :  24-30  Huss  speaks  of  the  use  of  German  at  the 
city  hall  by  doctors,  canons  and  monks.     See  Hofler,  232. 


8o  JOHN  HUSS 

for  a  dog  defends  the  couch  on  which  he  Hes  and,  if  another 
dog  drives  him  away  he  fights,  but  we  let  the  Germans  op- 
press us  and  occupy  all  offices  without  complaint." 

The  jealousy  had  several  times  found  heated  expression, 
especially  in  1390  in  a  case  involving  the  distribution  of  bene- 
fices and  scholarships.  This  dispute  called  forth  interference 
from  the  king.  Now  that  the  feeling  again  ran  high  over  the 
subject  of  WycUfism  and  universals  and  also  in  the  matter  of 
papal  allegiance,  the  racial  suspicions  were  aroused  to  an  un- 
exampled pitch.  A  commission  presented  the  case  to  the  king 
at  Kuttenberg — Kutna  Hora.  Wenzel  promised  to  protect 
the  Germans,  and  turning  upon  Huss,  who  was  present,  re- 
proved him  with  such  vehemence  for  having  introduced 
heresy  into  the  kingdom  that  Huss  sickened  and  took  to  bed. 
But  Huss  had  gained  the  favor  of  Nicholas  of  Labkowicz,  who 
stood  high  in  the  king's  favor  and  helped  to  bring  about  in 
the  king  a  change  of  mind  in  regard  to  the  affairs  of  the 
university.  To  this  result,  no  doubt,  a  commission  from 
France  contributed,  which  at  the  time  was  visiting  the  king's 
court,  and  reminded  him  that  at  the  university  of  Paris  the 
French  had  three  votes  while  the  foreign  elements  or  nations 
had  together  only  one  vote.  The  three  votes  corresponded 
to  the  Gallic  nations,  Picard,  Norman,  and  French. 

The  king's  final  state  of  mind  was  set  forth  in  a  document 
issued  by  him  January  18,  1409,  and  read  before  the  univer- 
sity a  week  later.  It  set  aside  the  stipulation  of  the  original 
charter  and  gave  the  Bohemian  nation  three  votes  and  re- 
duced the  votes  of  the  foreign  nations  from  three  to  one.^ 
Referring  to  the  rule  in  force  in  the  university  of  Paris,  the 
decree  pronounced  it  highly  unseemly  and  unjust  for  foreigners 
to  have  larger  voting  power  at  Prague  than  the  native  Bo- 
hemians. The  three  nations  were  stirred  to  the  very  depths 
by  this  decision.  They  regarded  the  change  as  a  breach  of 
faith.    In  vain  did  they  protest  to  the  king,  insisting  upon  the 

'  The  papers  are  given,  Doc,  347-363. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  8i 

rights  pledged  at  the  foundation  of  the  university.  They 
predicted  that  the  new  law  would  mean  the  destruction  of 
the  institution  and  the  loss  of  the  three  nations.  A  compromise 
which  they  proposed  provided  that  the  Bohemians  should 
have  elections  and  examinations  of  their  own. 

At  the  same  time  the  three  nations  agreed  to  stand  to- 
gether and  bound  themselves  by  a  solemn  oath  that  they  would 
quit  Prague  and  not  return  unless  they  were  reinstated  in  all 
the  old  privileges. 

The  news  of  the  king's  action  was  taken  to  Huss  on  his 
sick-bed.  On  his  recovery  he  pubUcly  praised  the  king  for 
his  goodness  to  the  people,  and  from  the  pulpit  of  Bethlehem 
chapel,  as  was  charged,  called  upon  the  congregation  to 
thank  God  that  the  power  of  the  Teutons  was  reduced  and  the 
Bohemian  appeal  had  won. 

Forcible  measures  were  necessary  for  carrying  out  the 
new  order.  In  May,  1409,  Wenzel,  through  his  messenger, 
appeared  at  the  university,  demanded  the  resignation  of  the 
German  rector,  Henning  von  Baltenhagen,  and  installed  his 
secretary,  a  Czech,  Zdenek  of  Labaum,  in  his  place  and 
Simon  of  Tissnow  as  dean  of  the  faculty  of  philosophy.  The 
king's  action  was  defended  on  the  ground  that  the  Bohemians 
had  multiplied  greatly  during  the  fifty  years  since  the  uni- 
versity was  established  and  ''had  risen  above  the  foreigners 
in  every  science  and  faculty."  The  original  reason  for  the  dis- 
crimination, therefore,  no  longer  held.  The  Bohemian  nation 
should  rule  in  its  own  territory.  The  Teutonic  nation  would 
not  give  up  to  the  Bohemians  the  supremacy  at  Vienna  or 
Heidelberg.  The  principle  of  Luke  6  :  31  should  prevail: 
"As  ye  would  that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  you  also  to 
them  likewise."  The  Bohemian  nation  should  be  at  the  head 
and  not  at  the  foot  in  its  own  university.  To  the  king  belonged 
the  prerogative  of  regulating  the  affairs  of  a  Bohemian  in- 
stitution. The  passage  in  regard  to  the  tribute-money  and 
the  passage  bearing  on  obedience  to  the  king  in  the  first 


82  JOHN  HUSS 

Epistle  of  Peter  were  quoted  to  show  that  the  German  nation 
should  yield  obedience  to  the  king's  mandate.  The  canon  law 
and  the  civil  law  agreed  in  giving  to  the  inhabitants  of  a  land 
the  rule  over  foreigners  who  might  happen  to  be  within  its 
borders. 

True  to  their  oath,  the  foreign  professors  and  scholars 
seceded  in  a  body,  with  bag  and  baggage.  On  a  single  day 
two  thousand  withdrew  from  Prague,  and,  according  to  ^neas 
Sylvius,  five  thousand  altogether.^  Many  of  them  went  to 
Leipzig,  where  that  university  took  its  start  from  this  seces- 
sion, 1409.  Cambridge  owed  its  origin  to  a  secession  of 
students  from  Oxford,  and  Paris  university  had  also  witnessed 
secessions.  The  university  of  Prague,  which  was  at  once  re- 
duced to  five  hundred  students,  was  eulogized  by  the  council 
of  Constance,  141 6,  as  having  been  originally  ''that  noble 
university — studium  Pragense — which  was  numbered  amongst 
the  greatest  jewels  of  our  world.  From  being,  without  doubt, 
the  chief  school  among  the  Germans,  it  had  been  turned  by 
partisan  envy  into  a  desert  and  solitude."^  Since  the  emi- 
gration of  the  Germans  the  institution  has  remained  a  Bo- 
hemian school,  with  a  separate  faculty  for  German  students. 
With  the  secession,  the  city  also  lost  its  importance  as  a  Ger- 
man centre  of  trade. 

The  honor,  or  the  stigma,  of  being  the  chief  author  of 
this  change  fell  upon  Huss,  although  he  denied  the  charge  of 

1  ^neas  Sylvius,  chap.  35.  Una  die  supra  duo  millia  Pragam  reliquere; 
nee  dm  post  circiler  Iria  millia  secuti,  apiid  Lipsicam  Misna  civitatem  .  .  . 
universale  studium  erexere.  Procopius,  a  chronicler  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
follows  the  figures  of  /Eneas.  So  Berger,  p.  64,  who  includes  in  the  number 
the  dependents  of  the  emigrant  students,  and  Kiigelgen,  Gefangensehaftsbr., 
p.  ix.  Cochlceus,  Hist.  Huss,  p.  114,  speaks  of  30,000  students  at  Prague. 
XXX  millia  stude.ntum  ante  Huss.  pcstetn.  Two  thousand,  he  says,  emigrated 
to  Leipzig  and  3,000  to  Erfurt.  Holler,  p.  247,  gives  the  number  of  those  who 
left  Prague  as  at  least  20,000.  The  matriculation  rolls  of  the  university  of 
Leipzig  show  less  than  1,000  students  the  first  year,  but  this  number  cannot 
be  taken  as  decisive  for  the  size  of  the  secession.  Some  of  the  students  went 
to  other  universities. 

*  Doc,  p.  649. 


HUSS  AS  A  NATIONAL  LEADER  83 

being  responsible  for  the  expulsion  of  the  Germans.  To  the 
end  of  his  life  he  suffered  from  German  opposition,  which  the 
change  aroused,  and  at  Constance  he  was  faced  with  some  of 
the  teachers  who  had  been  forced  away  from  Prague  and  had 
emigrated  to  Leipzig. 

Constitutions  often  outlive  the  circumstances  under  which 
they  are  born.  From  our  standpoint,  although  the  Prague 
university  may  never  have  quite  regained  the  position  it 
lost  in  1409,  the  transfer  of  the  administration  to  the  hands 
of  the  Bohemians  was  proper.  The  motto  of  "Bohemia  for 
the  Bohemians"  was  natural  though  it  was  offensive  to  the 
German  element.  Prague  was  the  centre  of  Bohemia  and 
Bohemian  life.  The  reduction  of  German  patronage  was  to 
become  inevitable  by  the  increase  of  the  number  of  German 
universities  and  the  foundation  of  the  university  of  Basel 
by  Pius  II,  which  the  intellectual  and  literary  awakening  of 
Germany  demanded.^  When  accused  of  fanning  the  passions 
between  the  Teutons  and  Bohemians  in  his  preaching,  Huss 
denied  the  charge  and  declared  he  loved  a  good  German  better 
than  a  bad  Bohemian  brother  and  good  Enghsh  priests  than 
wicked  Bohemian  priests.^ 

Huss's  popularity  was  shown  by  his  being  elected  the 
first  rector  under  the  new  order,  October  15,  1409.  From 
thenceforth  the  university  was  associated  with  Hussitism, 
much  as  Oxford  was  with  Wyclifry.  The  older  members  of 
the  theological  faculty  were  now  about  to  withdraw  from  Huss, 

'  Hofler  wrote  his  work  on  Huss  and  the  change  of  the  university  charter 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  Czechism,  which  was  responsible  for  the  change 
in  the  charter,  committed  a  great  mistake  and  that,  instead  of  attempting  to 
make  Bohemia  the  rallying  ground  of  Slavism,  the  Czechs  should  endeavor  to 
make  it  a  bond  of  union  between  the  East  and  the  West.  He  insists  upon  the 
early  German  influence  in  Bohemia  from  the  time  of  Charlemagne,  when  it  was  a 
part  of  Charlemagne's  empire,  and  Wladislaus  II,  who  received  the  crown  from 
Barbarossa.  As  for  the  university,  he  praises  its  early  fame,  but  pronounces 
the  change  of  charter  a  breach  of  faith  and  a  violation  of  the  just  rights  of  the 
German  element.  Hofler,  p.  250,  quoting  Scrpp.  rer.  Boh.,  says  the  university 
was  a  gold-mine  for  the  city  of  Prague. 

'  Doc,  724. 


84  JOHN  HUSS 

whether  they  had  supported  him  in  his  Wyclifite  views  or 
only  as  regards  the  administration  of  the  institution.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  younger  members  followed  him.  In  141 7 
the  council  of  Constance  suspended  the  privileges  of  the 
school,  but  it  went  on  supporting  the  practice  of  communion 
in  both  kinds,  which  it  adopted  soon  after  Huss's  death. 


CHAPTER  V 
IN  OPEN  REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP 

Si  hie  pro  hareiico  habendiis  est,  haud  facile  quisquam  omnium  quos 
unquam  sol  vidit,  vere  Christianus  haheri  poteril. — Luther,  Pref.  to 
Huss's  Letters,  1537. 

If  Huss  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  heretic,  then  may  scarcely  any 
one  of  all  upon  whom  the  sun  has  looked  down  be  truly  held  to  be  a 
Christian. 

The  change  in  the  management  of  the  university  being 
made,  Huss  was  the  chief  popular  force  in  the  city  as  well 
as  the  leader  in  the  university  itself.  As  Berger  has  well  put 
it:  "The  Bethlehem  chapel  obscured  the  cathedral."  The 
justice  of  this  statement  was  put  to  the  test  in  the  open 
struggle  between  the  preacher  and  the  archbishop.  The  in- 
terest Bohemia  felt  in  the  Pisan  council  and  the  election  of  a 
new  pope  almost  completely  receded  before  the  interest  in 
the  measures  about  to  be  taken  for  the  extermination  of  the 
so-called  Wyclifite  heresy  in  Prague.  The  public  burning 
of  the  English  teacher's  books  by  the  archbishop,  Zbynek,  in 
1410,  is  the  most  notable  act  of  that  prelate's  episcopate 
and  his  culminating  blow  directed  against  the  new  party. 
This  spectacular  event  marks  a  crisis  in  the  religious  troubles 
in  Prague  and  Huss's  career. 

The  council  of  Pisa,  which  received  with  distinction 
Wenzel's  deputation,  decided  in  favor  of  his  claim  to  the  crown 
of  the  Romans  against  his  rival,  Ruprecht,  who  died  within 
a  year  thereafter.  Led  by  d'Ailly  and  others,  the  council 
proceeded  courageously  to  carry  out  one  part  of  its  programme, 
June  26,  1409,  by  the  election  of  the  Cretan,  Philargi,  car- 
dinal-archbishop of  Milan,  to  the  papal  dignity.    He  assumed 

8s 


86  JOHN  HUSS 

the  name  of  Alexander  V.  His  election  he  is  supposed  to  have 
owed  to  Balthasar  Cossa,  who  saw  in  the  pope's  advanced 
years  a  probability  of  his  early  death  and  the  possibility  of 
his  own  election  as  his  successor.  In  neither  hope  was  he  dis- 
appointed. Alexander  wore  the  tiara  less  than  a  year,  dying 
May,  1410. 
r  There  were  now  three  popes,  each  having  his  own  college 

of  cardinals.  And  the  spectacle  was  seen  at  Prague  of  two 
lines  being  acknowledged,  the  Pisan  line  by  the  king  and 
Gregory  XII  of  the  Roman  line  by  the  archbishop.  Threat- 
ened by  a  mob,  Zbynek  put  the  city  under  interdict  and  re- 
tired for  a  season  to  Rudnicz — Raudnitz — carrying  with  him 
treasures  from  the  crypt  of  St.  Wenceslaus  in  St.  Vite's 
cathedral.  Wiser  counsels  prevailed,  and  following  the  king's 
example  he  acknowledged  Alexander's  claims  September  2, 
1409.^  The  announcement  was  celebrated  in  the  capital  city 
by  the  ringing  of  the  great  bells  on  the  city  hall,  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  mass,  and  the  singing  of  Te  Deums  in  the  churches 
and  convents.  Six  hundred  bonfires  were  lit  in  front  of  as 
many  buildings  and  a  procession,  headed  by  the  mayor,  pro- 
ceeded through  the  streets. 

Huss  had  been  on  the  side  of  the  king,  and  his  sermons 
in  Bethlehem  chapel  were  such  as  to  increase  the  opposition 
of  the  archbishop's  party.  Statements  taken  down  from  his 
sermons  and  alleged  to  be  heretical  and  abusive  were  embodied 
by  priests  in  a  new  complaint  to  Zybnek.^  The  charges  were 
the  old  charges  dressed  up,  in  part,  in  new  clothes.  They  ac- 
cused Huss  of  calling  Rome  the  seat  of  antichrist  and  every 
priest,  taking  money  for  sacramental  acts,  a  heretic.  It  was 
also  charged  that  he  was  not  only  not  ashamed  to  praise 
Wyclif,  but  that  he  openly  proclaimed  his  personal  attach- 
ment  to  him.     Among   the  signers  of   this   document  was 

^  Doc,  368-373,  give  Wenzel's  profession  of  loyalty  to  the  Pisan  council 
and  Zbynek's  to  Alexander  V.     See  Palacky,  Gesch.,  246,  note. 
*  Doc,  164-169. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE   ARCHBISHOP         87 

Michael  Deutschbrod,  usually  called  Michael  de  Causis,  whom 
we  shall  often  meet  in  the  days  of  Huss's  imprisonment  and 
trial  in  Constance. 

Masters  and  students,  representing  the  dissent  of  the 
university  from  these  charges,  sent  a  protest  to  Rome  and  a 
commission  was  also  despatched  by  the  archbishop,  who  had 
changed  his  mind  in  regard  to  the  religious  conditions  of  his 
diocese.  The  archbishop's  commission  reported  that  heresy 
due  to  WycHfite  teachings  had  spread.  In  his  reply  to 
Zbynek,  dated  December  20,  1409,  Alexander  V  gave  the 
archbishop  instructions  to  proceed  forthwith,  and  as  if  in  the 
pope's  own  name,  against  the  insidious  heretical  infection. 
Using  the  language  of  Innocent  III,  the  pope  stigmatized 
heresy  as  a  wickedness  which  creeps  like  a  cancer — nequitia 
serpit  ut  cancer.  This  wickedness  plainly  enough  was  dis- 
tilled in  the  articles  of  the  condemned  arch-heretic,  John 
Wyclif ,  and  more  particularly  in  his  articles  on  the  eucharist. 
This  heretical  depravity  threatened  to  split  the  church,  and, 
to  prevent  the  spread  of  the  poison,  he  enjoined  the  arch- 
bishop to  proceed  in  the  course  upon  which  he  had  entered 
and  bade  him  associate  with  himself  a  council  of  four  doctors 
of  theology  and  two  jurisconsults.  This  council  should  take 
measures  to  prevent  the  further  dissemination  of  Wyclif's 
views  in  the  university  or  other  places,  threatening  to  apply 
the  treatment  due  heretics.  Preaching  to  the  people  was 
to  be  stopped  except  in  cathedral,  parish  and  conventual 
churches.  This  prohibition  forbade  all  preaching  in  all 
chapels,  even  such  as  had  special  papal  authority.  Wyclif's 
writings  and  tracts  were  to  be  given  up  to  the  archbishop, 
and  in  that  way  be  removed  from  the  eyes  of  the  faithful. 

The  bull  meant  that  Wyclif's  name  was  to  be  execrated 
and  Huss  silenced.  It  did  not  reach  Prague  until  March, 
14 10.  Zbynek  immediately  proceeded  to  carry  out  its  in- 
structions by  appointing  the  council.  In  June  the  drastic 
decree   went   forth   from    the   archbishop's   palace   ordering 


88  JOHN  HUSS 

Wyclif  s  books  gathered  up  and  burned,  and  forbidding  all 
preaching  except  in  the  cathedral,  collegiate,  parochial  and 
conventual  churches.  The  document  repeatedly  called  Wy- 
clif heresiarch  and  condemned  as  containing  heretical  state- 
ments seventeen  of  his  writings,  including  the  Trialogus, 
Dialogus,  the  de  corpora  Christi,  and  a  volume  of  his  sermons, 
and  ordered  all  copies  of  them  brought  to  the  archbishop's 
palace  within  six  days.  All  who  retained  in  their  possession 
books  of  Wyclif  were  to  be  solemnly  excommunicated  in  the 
churches  of  Prague  with  the  ringing  of  bells  and  the  dashing 
of  lighted  candles  to  the  ground.  All  communication  with 
such  persons  was  forbidden — in  meat  and  drink,  in  talk  and 
conversation,  in  buying  and  selling,  on  the  street  and  market- 
place, at  the  fire  or  bath — cibo,  potu,  oratione,  lociitione,  emp- 
tione,  venditione,  via,  foro,  igne,  halneo.  So  little  suspicion  did 
Huss  have  that  he  was  in  error  that  he  carried  his  own  copies 
of  Wyclif  to  Zbynek,  asking  him  to  point  out  the  errors  in 
them. 

These  fulminations  were  met  by  Huss  in  an  appeal  to  the 
pope  on  the  ground  that  the  pope  had  been  falsely  and  badly 
informed  and  in  a  similar  appeal  to  the  archbishop  on  the 
same  ground.^  The  excitement  in  the  city  was  intense  and 
a  distinct  party  was  developed  which  stood  by  Huss.  Within 
five  days  of  the  publication  of  Zbynek's  decree,  the  rector  and 
the  community  of  teachers  and  scholars  of  the  university 
joined  in  a  solemn  refusal  to  comply  with  the  archbishop's 
demands  on  the  ground  that  the  royal  and  papal  charter  gave 
the  archbishop  no  authority  over  the  university  in  the  matter 
of  teachings  and  books.  The  latter  came  under  the  juris- 
diction of  the  civil,  not  the  ecclesiastical,  authorities.  The 
university  appealed  to  the  king  for  protection  and  the  king 
went  so  far  as  to  persuade  the  archbishop  to  withhold  the 
execution  of  his  decree  until  Margrave  Jostof  Moravia,  a  man 

'Alexander  and  Zbynek's  bulls,  Doc,  374-386.     Huss's  description  of  this 
beginning  of  processes  against  him,  Doc,  188  sqq.     Mon.,  i  :  109,  293. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP         89 

with  some  scholarly  reputation,  should  reach  Prague  and 
pass  the  condemned  books  under  review.  Huss  had  sent  to 
the  prince  a  copy  of  a  translation  of  the  Trialogns} 

On  June  22,  which  was  the  Sabbath,  Huss  preached  to 
an  immense  throng.  He  referred  to  the  decree  calling  for  the 
burning  of  WycHf's  writings  and  charged  that  Alexander  V  had 
been  misinformed  with  regard  to  the  religious  conditions  in 
Bohemia.  Alexander,  he  said,  had  also  been  imposed  upon 
to  beHeve  that  the  Bohemians  held  doctrines  of  WycHf  which 
were  contrary  to  the  faith,  but  he  thanked  God  that  he  him- 
self had  not  found  a  single  Bohemian  who  was  a  heretic. 
At  this  the  congregation  exclaimed:  "They  He,  they  lie!" 
"Behold,"  Huss  went  on,  "I  have  appealed  against  the  arch- 
bishop's decree  and  do  now  appeal.  Will  you  stand  by  me?" 
The  people  then  called  out  in  Czech:  "We  will  and  do  stand 
by  you."  Continuing,  Huss  declared  it  was  his  duty  to  preach 
and  he  would  go  on  preaching  or  be  expelled  from  the  land  or 
die  in  prison  because  popes  could  he  and  had  Ued,  but  God 
cannot  Ue.  He  then  called  upon  the  congregation  to  be  stead- 
fast and  not  intimidated  by  the  decree  of  excommunication.^ 

A  few  days  later,  June  25,  1410,  Huss,  who  called  himself 
Rector  and  Preacher  of  the  Chapel  of  the  Innocents,  sup- 
ported by  seven  other  teachers  and  students,  made  an  elabo- 
rate and  vigorous  protest  against  the  decree.^  The  names  of 
Stanislaus  of  Znaim  and  Stephen  Palecz  are  missing  among 
those  who  signed  the  protest.  The  action  of  Zbynek  is  con- 
demned, who,  as  chancellor  of  the  university,  had  demanded 
the  giving  up  of  the  writings  which  had  been  purchased  or 
copied  at  great  cost  of  labor  and  money.  Only  one  ignorant 
of  the  Bible  and  canon  law  would  think  of  burning  books  on 
logic,  philosophy  and  mathematics  containing  no  theological 
errors  but,  on  the  contrary,  wholesome  truths.  If  they  con- 
tained errors,  it  was  important  for  the  masters  and  bachelors 

*  Palacky,  Gesch.,  251. 

*Z>oc.,4os.  'Z)of., 386-397.    Mom.,  I  :  111-116. 


90  JOHN  HUSS 

to  possess  the  books  in  order  to  refute  them.  Paul  had 
quoted  from  Gentile  writings.  Nor  did  the  New  Testament 
condemn  all  books  of  pagan  authors  to  the  flames.  Aristotle, 
Averrhoes,  and  other  philosophers  were  studied  though  they 
might  hold  errors.  By  such  a  rule  as  Zbynek  laid  down,  even 
the  works  of  the  Master  of  Sentences,  Peter  the  Lombard,  all 
of  whose  sayings  were  not  accepted  by  the  doctors,  and  the 
works  of  Origen  and  other  doctors  would  have  to  be  con- 
demned. 

In  protesting  against  the  closing  of  chapels  to  preaching, 
Huss  entered  into  the  history  of  Bethlehem  chapel,  founded 
by  Count  John  Miihlheim,  and  the  terms  of  the  gift,  includ- 
ing the  stipulation,  confirmed  by  the  pope  and  Wenzel,  that 
the  preaching  should  be  in  the  Bohemian  language.  The  pro- 
hibition was  against  the  example  and  teaching  of  Christ  as 
well  as  the  papal  letters  sanctioning  the  chapel.  Christ  had 
preached  on  the  lake  and  on  the  mountain,  in  the  street  and 
on  the  highway  as  well  as  in  the  synagogues,  and  had  com- 
manded his  disciples  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the 
Gospel.  Zbynek's  sentence,  setting  aside  the  Scriptures  and 
the  decrees  of  the  holy  Fathers,  denied  to  the  priest  his  in- 
herent right  to  exercise  the  office  of  preaching  the  Word  of 
God.  Huss  again  charged  Alexander's  bull  was  gotten  up 
under  mendacious  and  crooked  information,  and  therefore 
Zbynek's  bull  with  its  inhibition  was  null.  The  case  was 
pending  at  Rome.  Huss  and  his  associates  affirmed  that  they 
had  no  purpose  of  advocating  any  errors  in  books  condemned 
by  Zbynek,  and,  for  the  reasons  given,  they  intended  to  dis- 
regard and  disobey  Zbynek's  bull — parere  et  ohedire  non  in- 
tendimus}  In  those  things  which  pertain  to  salvation  and 
the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God  they  must  obey  God  rather 
than  man,  and  they  appealed  to  John  XXIII.  In  a  letter 
written  to  the  cardinals,  141 1,  and  a  statement  made  in  Con- 
stance,  1414,  Huss  declared  that  there  were  many  chapels 

*  Doc,  p.  391. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE   ARCHBISHOP         91 

in  Bohemia  founded  as  places  of  preaching  and  confirmed  by 
papal  decree,  and  also  that  Zbynek  had  never  read  the  books 
of  Wyclif  which  he  had  condemned  to  the  flames.^ 

On  July  16,  1410,  the  day  appointed  for  the  burning, 
more  than  two  hundred  manuscripts  of  the  English  Reformer 
were  piled  in  a  heap  in  the  court  of  the  archbishop's  palace 
on  the  Hradschin  and  burned.  The  approaches  were  carefully 
guarded  by  soldiers.  Members  of  the  chapter  and  many  other 
clerics  were  present.  The  archbishop  is  said  to  have  set 
fire  to  the  books  with  his  own  hand.  While  the  flames  were 
consuming  the  precious  volumes,  aTe  Deum  was  sung.  ^Eneas 
Sylvius  reports  that  many  of  them  were  richly  bound,  a  fact 
he  emphasizes  over  against  "the  madness  of  the  Wyclifites." 
One  of  those  who  had  participated  in  the  clamor  for  the  cre- 
mation was  the  rector  of  St.  ^Egidius,  Peter  of  Peklo,  who 
affirmed  he  had  descended  to  hell  and  seen  Wychf  there,  a 
fancy  in  regard  to  which  John  of  Giczin  plausibly  remarked 
that  there  were  no  other  witnesses  and  for  this  reason,  if 
no  other,  the  deposition  was  a  preposterous  lie.  It  was 
this  Peter  who  testified  that  he  had  often  heard  Huss  say  in 
public  that  we  can  be  well  saved  without  the  pope.^ 

This  method  of  attempting  to  put  an  end  to  a  heretic's 
influence  was  of  old  standing  in  the  Christian  church.  Soon 
after  the  council  at  Nice,  the  emperor  Constantine  ordered 
the  books  of  the  Arians  burned.  The  books  of  Gottschalck 
advocating  the  double  decree  of  predestination  were  given  to 
the  flames  in  the  ninth  century.  In  the  twelfth  Abelard's 
treatises  were  consigned  to  the  flames  in  Rome  before  he  could 
get  to  the  holy  city  to  make  his  proposed  defense.  And 
this  spectacle  at  Prague  points  forward  to  the  burning,  a  cen- 
tury later,  in  St  Paul's  Churchyard,  London,  of  all  the  copies 

'  Doc,  pp.  24,  189.  The  charge  was  made  that  Zbynek's  bull  had  been 
purchased  at  Rome  at  a  great  price. 

^  Doc,  178.  For  Giczin,  see  Loserth,  Appendix,  pp.  335  sq.  Loserth,  p. 
120,  cites  a  contemporary  manuscript  in  the  palace  library,  Vienna,  which 
enumerates  ninety  Wyclifian  tracts  and  treatises  in  circulation  in  Bohemia. 


92  JOHN  HUSS 

of  Tyndale's  New  Testament  which  Bishop  Tonstall  could 
seize  or  purchase. 

The  flames  in  the  archbishop's  courtyard  only  served  to 
intensify  the  religious  feeling  in  Prague.  In  popular  songs 
Zbynek  was  lampooned  as  the  ABC  bishop: 

"Zbynek,  Bishop  A  B  C 
Burned  the  books,  but  never  knew  he 
What  was  in  them  written." 

Finding  it  expedient  to  seek  safety  from  threatened  violence, 
the  archbishop  withdrew  to  Raudnitz. 

Two  days  after  the  burning,  July  i8,  he  pronounced  the 
ban  of  excommunication  against  Huss  and  seven  other  masters 
and  students,  mentioned  by  name,  and  their  adherents,  who 
"on  frivolous  grounds  had  sent  the  frivolous  appeal  to  Rome." 
They  were  pronounced  rebels  and  disobedient  to  the  Catholic 
faith.  The  sentence  was  ordered  announced  in  churches  with 
the  usual  solemn  ceremonies,  the  ringing  of  bells  and  the 
dashing  of  lighted  tapers  to  the  floor.^ 

The  anathema  which  had  so  often  silenced  opposition  and 
secured  submission  from  kings  and  nations  was  in  this  case 
disregarded.  It  was  looked  upon  as  setting  aside  the  cor- 
porate rights  of  the  university  as  well  as  all  right  of  being 
heard  before  the  law.  The  party  passion  was  so  heated  that 
even  homicide  was  committed  on  the  streets.  On  the  Sabbath 
following  Zbynek's  decree,  the  priests  announced  the  excom- 
munication amidst  violent  disturbances  in  many  of  the 
churches.  In  the  cathedral  itself,  July  22,  when  high  mass 
was  being  celebrated,  the  priest  was  forced  by  the  uproar  to 
leave  the  church,  and  on  the  same  day  in  St.  Stephen's  six 
men  rushed  on  the  priest  with  drawn  swords,  threatening  his 
life  when  he  began  to  speak  against  Huss.  The  other  party 
practised  reprisal  and  punished  all  Hussite  sympathizers 
venturing  within  the  cathedral  precincts.     The  public  officials 

1  Doc,  397-399- 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP         93 

of  the  city  formally  declared  that  the  prohibition  of  preaching 
in  the  chapels  and  the  cremation  "had  roused  strife  and 
hatred  among  faithful  Catholics,  started  fires,  and  resulted  in 
homicide."^ 

Huss  and  other  defenders  of  Wyclif  carried  the  matter  to 
the  public  platform.  Dividing  several  of  Wyclif's  writings 
among  themselves,  Huss  and  five  others,  after  giving  public 
notice,  defended  them  in  addresses  in  the  churches  during  the 
last  days  of  July  and  the  6th  of  August.^  Simon  of  Tissnow 
declared  that  the  only  excuse  that  could  be  given  for  the 
burning  of  Wyclif's  books  was  Zbynek's  ignorance.  "There- 
fore," he  said,  "let  him  be  spared  and  prayed  for."  Defend- 
ing the  tract  on  the  Decalogue,  Jacob  of  Mies  found  in  it 
"vital  truth  and  evangelical  doctrine,  which  it  behooved  every 
Christian  to  defend  even  to  the  death,  yea,  against  princi- 
palities and  powers  and  the  rulers  of  the  darkness  of  this  world 
which  had  risen  up  against  them."  For  his  good  life  and  con- 
versation WycHf,  so  Procopius  assured  his  hearers,  deserved 
to  be  regarded  as  "  the  evangehcal  doctor."  Only  the  wanton, 
the  rich  in  the  things  of  this  world,  and  luxurious  livers  called 
him  a  heretic.  He  wished  that  Gamaliel's  counsel  had  been 
borne  in  mind  when  the  question  of  condemning  the  books 
was  under  consideration.  Zdislav  called  Zbynek's  bonfire 
a  silly  spectacle.  Wyclif's  writings  were  indeed  most  useful 
and  if  they  deserved  to  be  burned  for  containing  alleged 
heresies  then  why  should  not  the  whole  earth  be  burned  up, 
for  it  was  full  of  heresies,  and  why  not  all  Jews  and  libertines 
who  openly  deny  Christ  as  Lord.  The  condemnation  and 
cremation  in  the  archbishop's  courtyard  were  not  only  a  de- 
fiance of  God  and  justice,  but  a  damage  to  the  whole  kingdom 
of  Bohemia  by  threatening  the  freedom  of  the  university. 

*  Palacky,  Gesch.,  253.     Doc,  415. 

^  Loserth,  Appendix  308-336,  gives  the  addresses  of  Simon  of  Tissncw  and 
Procopius  of  Pilsen  in  full,  and  those  of  Jacob  of  Mies,  Zdislav  of  Zwierzeticz 
and  Giczin  in  part.  Huss's  defense  of  Wyclif's  treatise  on  the  Trinity.  Mon. 
I  :  131-135- 


94  JOHN  HUSS 

In  the  defense  of  Wyclif 's  tract  on  the  Holy  Trinity  based 
upon  the  spurious  passage,  ''There  were  three  that  bear 
record  in  heaven,  the  Father,  the  Word,  and  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  these  three  are  one,"  I  John  5:7,  Huss  announced  him- 
self ready  to  stand  against  all  who  favored  the  burning 
of  the  books.  That  act  destroyed  sin  in  no  man's  heart,  but 
did  destroy  many  beautiful  and  profound  thoughts  found  in 
Wyclif's  works,  and  multiplied  disturbances,  envies,  and  re- 
criminations, and  provoked  homicide  in  the  city.  Like  the 
Apostles,  "he  could  not  help  but  speak  the  things  he  had  heard 
and  seen."  He  was  in  duty  bound  to  speak  in  the  Bethlehem 
chapel  though  forbidden  by  the  apostolic  see  and  his  diocesan. 
The  condemnation  and  the  cremation  had  worked  ill  for  the 
kingdom  of  Bohemia,  and,  as  for  the  prohibition  of  preaching 
— evangelizatio — it  savored  not  of  the  way  of  Christ,  who  com- 
manded that  his  Gospel  should  be  preached  in  the  whole 
world.  Even  if  WycHf's  writings  were  found  to  contain  her- 
esies, they  ought  no  more  to  be  burned  than  are  good  people 
to  be  burned  who  mingle  with  heretics  or  the  wheat  which  is 
mixed  with  the  chaff.  Did  not  God  promise  to  spare  Sodom 
if  even  ten  righteous  men  should  be  found  therein?  Huss  then 
quoted  Jerome,  Augustine  and  Ambrose  in  favor  of  the  read- 
ing of  heretical  books  in  order  that  heresies  might  be  an- 
swered and  confidence  in  the  Scriptures  established.  Chrys- 
ostom  suffered  excommunication  from  his  bishop  rather 
than  join  in  the  condemnation  of  Origen's  works.  Christ 
himself  condescended  to  dispute  with  the  Sadducean  and 
other  heretics. 

Huss's  treatise  is  far  above  the  treatments  of  the  other 
writers  in  the  high  rehgious  tone  it  assumes  as  well  as  its 
matter.  It  shows  a  warm  devotion  to  the  English  master  and 
announces  Huss's  readiness  to  suffer  for  his  convictions.  His 
attitude  was  that  of  the  open  mind  to  dismiss  old  opinions 
for  new  ones  which  his  conscience  might  determine  to  be  bet- 
ter opinions.     This  attitude  of  mind  he  sets  forth  in  a  noble 


REVOLT  AGAINST   THE   ARCHBISHOP         95 

statement  largely  drawn  from  Wyclif  and  quoted  in  another      ^ 
part  of  this  book. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  letters  preserved  from  Huss's 
pen  was  written  in  the  midst  of  this  turbulence,  1410,  in  reply 
to  a  letter  from  Richard  Wyche,  whom  Huss  denominates  "a, 
companion  of  Wyclif  in  the  labors  of  the  Gospel."  Wyche 
was  a  Lollard  and  was  brought  before  the  bishop  of  Durham 
in  1399  for  his  views  on  the  sacrament  of  the  altar  and  im- 
prisoned. He  afterward  renounced  his  offensive  position  and 
was  appointed  vicar  of  Deptford,  One  of  his  letters,  recently 
discovered,  addressed  to  friends  in  Newcastle,  has  been  pub- 
lished in  the  English  Historical  Review.  Wyche's  communi- 
cation was  full  of  sympathy  and  consolation, — "enough," 
Huss  says,  "even  if  there  had  been  no  other  writing  to  nerve 
him  to  expose  his  life  for  Christ  even  unto  death."  Wyche 
addressed  Huss  as  "his  most  dearly  beloved  brother  in 
Christ,"  bade  him  labor  like  a  good  soldier  of  Jesus  Christ, 
to  preach  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  and  to  call  as  many  as  he 
might  be  able  to  the  way  of  the  truth.  Huss  read  the  letter 
to  a  great  multitude,  whose  number  he  estimated  at  ten  / 
thousand,  and  so  deep,  according  to  his  own  words,  was  the 
impression  which  it  made  that  the  hearers  asked  him  to  trans- 
late it  into  their  native  tongue. 

In  his  reply  to  Wyche  he  begged  him  for  the  help  of  his 
prayers  and  thanked  him  again  and  again  for  the  good  things 
which  Bohemia  was  receiving  from  blessed  England— Jews- 
dicta  Anglia.  As  for  the  condition  of  affairs  in  Bohemia,  he 
asserted  that  the  people  which  had  walked  in  darkness  had 
now  seen  the  great  light  of  Jesus  Christ.  Unto  those  that 
dwelt  in  the  region  of  the  shadow  of  death  the  light  of  truth 
had  appeared.  With  the  help  of  the  Saviour,  barons,  counts, 
lords,  and  the  common  people,  yea,  all  classes,  were  accepting 
the  truth  with  great  ardor.  The  people  would  listen  to  noth- 
ing but  the  Holy  Scriptures,  especially  the  Gospel  and  the 
Epistles,  and  wherever  the  Gospel  was  preached,  in  city, 


96  JOHN  HUSS 

village  or  castle,  throngs  welcomed  the  preacher  of  the  sacred 
truth.  But  gently  had  he  "touched  the  tail  of  Behemoth, 
which  is  Satan,  and  Behemoth  had  opened  his  jaws  to  swallow 
up  both  him  and  his  brethren.  He  is  furious  and  charges 
with  lying  tongue  many  with  heresy,  blows  up  the  flame  of 
church  censure,  and  sends  his  threats  to  neighboring  regions, 
and  yet  at  home  Behemoth  had  not  dared  to  touch  his  own 
neck."  Huss  closed  his  letter  by  sending  greetings  "from  the 
Church  of  Christ  in  Bohemia  to  the  Church  of  Christ  in  Eng- 
land," and  saying  that  "the  king  and  his  entire  cabinet,  the 
queen's  barons,  and  the  common  people  were  for  the  Word  of 
Jesus  Christ." 

If  we  are  to  judge  by  the  statements  of  this  letter  and  the 
statements  made  in  the  appeal  of  the  masters  to  the  pope, 
June  25,  1410,  the  pressure  to  hear  the  preaching  of  the  truth 
from  the  lips  of  Huss  and  by  other  preachers  in  Prague  must 
have  been  very  great.  In  the  twenty-first  chapter  of  his 
Treatise  on  the  Church,  Huss  expresses  himself  as  feeling  that 
the  time  was  one  of  rehgious  awakening  in  which  God  in  an 
unusual  manner  was  revealing  His  truth  to  the  people  of 
Prague  and  endueing  them  with  special  power  to  endure 
under  persecution.  The  party  he  represented  was  in  some 
quarters  called  "the  evangelical  party." ^ 

The  king  gave  proof  of  his  favor  for  Huss  by  requesting 
that  the  archbishop  reimburse  the  owners  of  Wyclif's  writings 
for  their  loss  and,  when  he  refused,  Wenzel  sequestrated  the 
incomes  of  the  clergy  who  were  taking  part  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  excommunication.  When  two  doctors  of  Bologna 
arrived  in  Prague  to  announce  John  XXIII's  election,  Wenzel 
and  Sophia  and  a  group  of  nobles  interceded  with  them  to 
use  their  influence  in  having  Alexander's  bull  withdrawn. 
But  Huss  had  openly  resisted  church  authority.  He  was 
under  excommunication  and  the  ban  of  the  archbishop  had 
behind  it  papal  authority.  No  longer  was  it  simply  a  ques- 
^Doc,  12-14,  394-    Mon.,  i  :  306,  331. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP         97 

tion  of  Wyclif's  heresy.  Huss  himself,  if  he  was  not  a  heretic, 
was  insubordinate  to  the  church  authorities.  Writers  usually  / 
represent  Huss's  case  at  this  time  as  being  a  revolt  against 
church  discipline  and  that  only,  and  not  against  the  accredited  . 
dogmatic  teachings  of  the  church.  There  is  some  ground  for 
this  view.  At  the  same  time,  Huss's  teaching  was  too  free  to 
be  within  the  limits  prescribed  by  the  church.  He  was  al- 
ready in  opposition  to  the  dogma  of  the  supremacy  of  the 
church  as  against  the  supremacy  of  the  Scriptures.  Al- 
though he  had  taken  the  ground  that  Alexander  V  had  issued 
his  decision  upon  the  basis  of  false  information,  Huss  had  in 
effect  exposed  himself  to  the  just  charge  of  contumacy  when 
he  declared  in  Bethlehem  chapel  that  it  was  his  intention  to 
obey  God  rather  than  man.  Wyclif  had  been  condemned 
in  England  and  by  Gregory  XI,  and  the  public  defense  which 
Huss  and  his  colleagues  made  of  Wyclif's  writings  was  a 
most  hazardous  exercise  of  the  right  of  private  judgment,  a 
right  abhorrent  to  the  ecclesiastical  system  built  up  in  the 
Middle  Ages. 

John  XXIII,  to  whom  Huss  had  appealed  from  the  arch- 
bishop's mandate,  put  Huss's  appeal  into  the  hands  of 
four  cardinals,  who  had  Wyclif's  books  examined  by  theo- 
logical doctors  of  Bologna.  The  majority  of  these  doctors, 
after  consulting  with  Paris  and  Oxford  masters  who  were  in 
Bologna,  failed  to  find  anything  in  them  to  call  for  their 
being  burned  or  taken  from  the  hands  of  students.  On  the 
contrary,  they  contained  many  good  things.  However,  there 
were  certain  articles  drawn  from  the  Dialogus  and  Trialogus 
which  should  not  be  taught.  The  archbishop's  party  was  also 
active  at  the  papal  court  and  John  placed  the  case  in  the 
hands  of  Cardinal  Oddo  of  Colonna,  afterward  Pope  Martin 
V,  with  the  result  that  Huss  was  cited  to  appear  in  person  in 
Rome  to  be  examined  on  the  charges  made  against  him.^ 

In  the  meantime,  in  personal  communications  addressed  to 
^  Doc,  190,  406.    Mon.,  I  :  109. 


98  JOHN  HUSS 

the  cardinals,  the  king  and  queen  were  interceding  for  Huss. 
They  protested  against  the  archbishop's  decree  burning 
Wyclif's  books  and  the  closing  of  Bethlehem  chapel  to  preach- 
ing. The  king  pronounced  Alexander's  bull  precipitate,  and 
asked  that  the  edict  against  free  preaching  in  the  chapels 
might  be  withdrawn.  It  was  based  on  the  unfounded  sus- 
picion that  the  hearts  of  the  people  of  Prague  were  infected 
with  heresy.  "How,"  he  wrote,  "could  the  vine  of  Engedi 
be  expected  to  flourish  if  the  stalk  of  the  Word  of  God  were 
cut  off  at  the  root,"  that  is,  if  preaching  were  stopped?  In 
three  letters  to  the  pope  the  queen  spoke  with  warm  affection 
of  Bethlehem  chapel  and  the  profit  it  had  been  to  her  and 
members  of  her  court  as  the  centre  where  the  Word  of  God 
was  preached.  The  decree  prohibiting  preaching  would  im- 
pede the  flow  of  salvation  for  the  people  and  herself.  She 
begged  the  pope  for  freedom  of  preaching — lihertatio  pradica- 
tionis  evangeliccE.  Helfert  speaks  of  the  undue  interference  of 
Sophia  in  the  affairs  of  Huss.  He  says  rightly  that  she  had  a 
considerable  influence  in  promoting  the  growth  of  Hussitism. 

Other  members  of  the  court  also  addressed  the  pope  in 
Huss's  interest.  Thousands  had  heard  Huss  at  the  Bethle- 
hem chapel,  so  wrote  Baron  Lacek  of  Krawar  to  the  pope. 
The  people  were  confounded  and  indignant  at  the  silencing  of 
Huss's  voice  and  of  being  deprived  of  the  Word  of  God — ver- 
bum  Domini  privari. 

To  these  intercessions  and  others  like  them  the  magis- 
trates of  Prague  added  their  petition,  begging  John  XXIII 
that  he  might  grant  relief  from  the  inhibition  of  preaching 
in  the  chapels,  declaring  at  the  same  time  that  it  would  be  the 
salvation  "of  our  community  for  the  Word  of  God  to  be 
preached  more  freely  and  copiously"  as  they  had  had  proof 
in  the  good  influence  of  a  single  preacher  at  Bethlehem 
chapel. 

In  order  to  secure  a  withdrawal  of  the  citation  to  appear 
personally  before  the  papal  court,  Huss  despatched  a  cele- 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP         99 

brated  professor  of  canon  law,  John  of  Jesenicz,  and  two  other 
procurators  to  Italy  to  plead  his  cause.  From  a  jurisconsult 
of  Bologna,  Thomas  of  Udine,  a  Dominican  friar,  Jesenicz  got 
a  decision.  Later  Huss's  representatives  were  thrown  into 
prison.  Jesenicz  remained  faithful  to  Huss  to  the  end  and 
had  recourse  to  all  the  technicalities  of  the  law  to  free  him 
from  the  sentence  of  heresy. 

When  Cardinal  Colonna's  citation  was  issued  for  Huss 
to  appear  in  person  before  the  curia,  it  called  forth  the  re- 
newed interposition  of  the  Bohemian  king  and  queen.  In 
letters  to  John  XXIII  and  the  cardinals,  they  prayed  that 
Huss  might  be  absolved  from  going  in  person  to  Rome.^ 
They  both  referred  to  him  as  their  beloved  and  devoted  chap- 
lain. The  king  demanded  that  Huss's  accusers  be  enjoined 
to  keep  silent,  that  its  privileges  be  restored  to  Bethlehem, 
and  that  Huss  be  allowed  to  go  on  with  his  work  in  the  pulpit; 
for,  he  wrote,  "it  was  not  a  seemly  thing  that  in  his  kingdom 
a  man  so  useful  in  his  preaching  should  be  exposed  to  the  judg- 
ment of  enemies  and  the  whole  multitude  of  the  people  thrown 
into  unrest."  Huss,  the  king  declared,  had  been  always 
ready  to  answer  for  his  opinions  before  the  university  or  any 
other  tribunal.  "The  perils  by  the  way"  were  the  reason 
Wenzel  gave  for  his  asking  Colonna  that  Huss  be  excused  from 
personally  appearing  in  Rome.  The  king  also  expressed  the 
wish  that  Colonna  visit  Prague,  become  conversant  with  the 
conditions  with  his  own  eyes,  and  give  Huss  a  hearing  there. 
The  queen,  joining  her  husband  in  his  requests,  repeated  that 
she  had  often  heard  Huss  in  the  Bethlehem  chapel  and  begged 
that  for  the  honor  of  God  and  the  salvation  and  the  quiet  of 
the  people  Huss  might  be  relieved  from  all  suspicion. 

The  perils  by  the  way,  of  which  the  king  wrote,  Huss  him- 
self gave  in  his  letters  and  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church,  and 
also  at  Constance  as  a  reason  for  not  answering  the  curia's  cita- 
tion in  person.    In  a  letter  to  the  Bohemian  council,  December, 

'  Doc,  422-426. 


loo  JOHN  HUSS 

141 1,  he  announced  that  traps  were  set  for  him  all  along  the 
road  with  the  intention  that  he  should  not  return  to  Bohemia. 
In  another  letter  he  asserted  that  his  procurators  had  advised 
him  not  to  go,  as  it  would  involve  the  giving  up  of  his  work  in 
Prague,  and  if  he  started  he  would  be  fooUshly  exposing  his 
life.  At  the  same  time,  he  affirmed  he  was  ready  with  Christ's 
help  to  appear  at  Rome  if  thereby,  or  even  by  his  death,  he 
could  profit  some  to  salvation.  Again,  in  his  appeal  from  the 
pope's  final  decision,  141 2,  he  referred  to  these  traps  and 
he  justified  himself  by  referring  to  the  imprisonment  and 
spoHation  to  which  Palecz  and  Stanislaus  had  been  subjected 
in  Bologna,  1409.  He  also  alleged  the  cost  of  the  journey  to 
Rome,  300  miles  away,  and  demanded  trial  in  Prague  the 
place  where  the  assumed  offense  was  committed.^ 

Neither  the  letters  from  the  queen  and  the  king  and 
other  persons  high  in  position  nor  the  solicitations  of  the 
king's  personal  representatives  at  the  papal  court,  John  Naas, 
a  doctor  of  both  laws,  and  John  of  Reinstein  were  sufficient 
to  procure  a  withdrawal  or  modification  of  the  summons  of 
citation.  In  the  proceedings,  which  led  to  the  refusal  of  the 
cardinals  to  make  any  change,  Zbynek  was  reported  to  have 
spent  large  sums  at  Rome.^ 

The  next  step  was  inevitable.  For  his  contumacy.  Car- 
dinal Colonna  in  February,  141 1,  placed  Huss  together  with 
all  his  followers  and  sympathizers  under  excommunication. 
Much  as  such  a  use  of  ecclesiastical  prerogative  is  at  variance 
with  Protestant  opinion  in  the  twentieth  century,  the  methods 
in  vogue  in  that  age  left  no  sufficient  ground  for  Huss's  com- 
plaint that  he  was  excommunicated  without  a  hearing  and 
without  being  guilty  of  heresy.^ 

For  a  reason  unknown  to  us  the  case  was  taken  out  of 
Colonna's  hands  and  transferred  again  to  a  commission  of 

1  Doc,  24,  32,  190,  466.    Mon.,  I  :  304,  324,  etc. 

^  Chron.  Univ.  Prag.,  as  quoted  by  Palacky,  Gesch.,  p.  264.    Loserth,  170. 

^  Doc,  191,  202. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE   ARCHBISHOP        loi 

cardinals,  including  the  enlightened  cardinal  Zabarella  of 
Florence,  who  was  to  have  a  large  part  in  the  investigation 
of  Huss's  case  at  Constance.  Again  a  change  was  made,  and 
the  case  was  put  into  the  hands  of  Cardinal  Brancas,  who 
seems  to  have  taken  no  further  action  for  more  than  a  year. 
Announcement  was  made  of  Colonna's  excommunication, 
March  15,  1411,  in  all  the  churches  of  Prague  except  two, 
St,  Michael's,  whose  rector  was  Christian  of  Prachaticz,  and 
St.  Benedict's. 

In  Prague  the  archbishop  and  his  clergy  were  sufTering 
indignities  with  the  king's  connivance  if  not  at  his  express 
command.  The  city  authorities  took  part  in  opposing  the 
curia  by  withholding  or  diverting  tithes  and  usufructs. 
Zbynek  defended  himself  by  the  use  of  his  judicial  prerogative, 
launching  the  ban  against  the  civil  authorities  of  Prague 
and  the  Wyssehrad,  and  pronouncing  the  interdict  over  the 
city  of  Prague.^  But  the  preaching  went  on  and  the  insults 
to  the  clergy  who  remained  faithful  to  the  archbishop  did 
not  abate.  In  spite  of  the  king's  order,  the  streets  continued 
to  resound  with  the  derisive  songs.  Some  of  the  turbulent 
priests  were  expelled  by  the  king  from  the  city,  and,  probably 
in  view  of  the  archbishop's  disposition  of  the  relics  of  St. 
Wenceslaus  a  few  years  before,  Wenzel  appeared  in  person 
in  the  cathedral  and  ordered  the  canons  to  produce  the  trea- 
sures hid  in  its  vaults  and  shrines  and  bade  his  civil  servants 
remove  them  to  Karlstein. 

The  position  which  the  court  and  municipal  authorities 
Jiad  assumed  would  have  made  useless  an  appeal  on  the  part 
of  the  archbishop  for  the  enforcement  of  his  ecclesiastical 
censures.  The  king  went  so  far  as  to  forbid  any  one  to  carry 
a  civil  case  before  the  ecclesiastical  court  on  pain  of  losing 
the  perquisites  of  his  office  or  the  very  office  itself.  Here 
we  may  be  incUned  to  discern  Wyclif's  influence. 

A  serious  effort  was  now  made  by  the  contending  parties 

*  Doc,  429  sqq. 


I02  JOHN  HUSS 

to  heal  the  dispute  and  took  the  form  of  a  pact  signed  by  the 
archbishop  and  the  university,  July  3,  141 1,  by  which  the 
entire  controversy  was  referred  to  the  king  and  his  councillors 
for  arbitration,  both  parties  declaring  that  they  entered  into 
it  of  their  own  free  will  and  agreeing  to  abide  by  the  decision.^ 
The  university  had  petitioned  Zbynek  to  remove  the  decree 
of  excommunication  from  Huss,  and  Palecz  set  forth  con- 
siderations which  would  justify  the  archbishop  in  lifting  the 
interdict  from  the  city.  One  of  the  considerations  put  forth 
by  the  signers  of  this  pact  was  the  labor  and  expense  that 
would  be  incurred  in  arguing  the  case  at  Rome.  The  docu- 
ment was  signed  in  the  presence  of  a  company  of  noblemen 
and  attested  by  the  public  notary,  Nicholas  of  Prachaticz. 
Among  the  signers  were  Simon  of  Tissnow,  the  rector  of  the 
university,  Stephen  Palecz,  John  of  Reinstein  and  Huss. 

The  commission  of  arbitration,  consisting  of  Wenceslaus, 
patriarch  of  Jerusalem  and  the  bishop  of  Olmiitz,  and  Duke 
Rudolph  of  Saxony,  Lacek  of  Krawar,  and  other  leading  noble- 
men, acted  promptly.  Their  report,  which  was  ready  in  three 
days,  called  upon  the  archbishop  to  submit  to  the  authority 
of  the  king  as  his  lord  and  to  inform  his  holiness,  the  pope, 
that  so  far  as  he,  the  archbishop,  knew,  no  errors  were  current 
in  Bohemia,  and  that  the  difference  between  himself  and  the 
magistrates  had  been  amicably  brought  to  the  king's  court. 
He  was  to  intercede  with  the  pope  to  relax  the  ban  of  ex- 
communication for  all  persons  upon  whom  it  had  been  laid 
by  the  curia.  The  archbishop  was  also  to  Uft  the  bans  of 
excommunication  and  interdict  which  he  had  issued.  On 
his  part,  the  king  was  to  see  to  it  that  any  heresy  that  might 
be  detected  be  put  down  and  that  the  deprived  clergy  were 
reinstated  in  their  livings  and  their  goods  restored.  The 
university  was  assured  of  protection  in  all  the  privileges  and 
rights  conceded  to  it  up  to  that  time  by  popes,  Charles  IV 
and  Wenzel. 

1  Doc,  434-443- 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP        103 

Huss,  whose  case  was  responsible  for  all  the  trouble  in 
Prague,  wrote,  September  i,  141 1,  to  John  XXIII  a  sort 
of  confession  of  faith  and  on  the  same  day  addressed  the  col- 
lege of  cardinals.  In  his  communication  to  John,  which  he 
read  before  the  university,  he  affirmed  his  readiness,  at  all 
times,  to  make  full  confession  of  his  faith.  He  believed  in  the 
deity  of  Christ  and  that  not  an  iota  of  Christ's  words  would 
fail,  that  the  church  was  founded  upon  an  immovable  rock  and 
could  not  be  destroyed.  The  bulls  issued  against  him  were 
based  on  false  information.  False  was  the  charge  that  he  1;  | 
had  advocated  the  remanence  of  the  bread  and  wine  after  =  ^  1 
the  words  of  consecration.  False  that,  when  the  host  was 
elevated,  it  was  Christ's  body  and  that,  when  it  was  replaced 
on  the  table,  it  was  bread  only.  False,  further,  were  the 
charges  that  he  held  that  the  priest  in  mortal  sin  does  not 
perform  sacramental  acts,  that  temporal  lords  may  deprive 
the  clergy  of  their  goods,  that  indulgences  are  of  no  avail, 
and  that  the  civil  power  has  authority  to  compel  the  clergy 
by  resorting  to  the  sword.  False,  also,  was  the  charge  that  , 
he  was  responsible  for  the  expulsion  of  the  Germans  from  ^ 
the  imiversity.  As  for  his  complying  with  the  citation  to 
appear  at  Rome,  he  was  minded  to  obey  but  held  back  on 
account  of  the  snares  of  death  laid  for  him  in  Bohemia  and 
outside  of  it,  especially  by  the  Germans.  In  holding  back, 
he  was  following  the  advice  of  many  friends  and  moved  by 
the  fear  lest  he  tempt  God  by  courting  death. 

In  his  communication  to  the  cardinals,  he  expressed  his 
readiness  to  face  the  university  of  Prague,  the  Bohemian 
prelates  and  all  the  people  and  to  make  before  them  a  plain 
and  full  confession  of  his  faith,  even  if  at  the  time  of  doing 
it  the  fires  for  heretics  were  being  lighted. 

But  the  hope  of  peace  which  the  proposed  pact  aroused 
was  destined  to  disappointment.     In  abiding  by  its  stipula- 
tions, the  archbishop  would  be  giving  up  rights  which  had  / 
been  won  by  the  church  through  long  and  severe    conflicts. 


I04  JOHN  HUSS 

As  Thomas  a  Becket  soon  forgot  his  promise  of  assent  to  the 
Constitutions  of  Clarendon  and  repented  of  his  act  on  re- 
turning to  Canterbury,  so  Zbynek  quickly  receded  from  his 
oath  to  stand  by  the  action  of  the  royal  commission.  Even  a 
pope,  Pascal  II,  on  the  ground  of  coercion,  had  receded  from 
a  solemn  agreement  with  the  emperor  Henry  V  over  inves- 
titure so  soon  as  the  prince  was  well  on  the  northern  side  of 
the  Alps.  Zbynek  went  so  far  as  to  address  the  promised 
letter  to  John  XXIII. ^  It  is  still  extant,  but  it  was  never  sent. 
In  this  communication  he  expressed  the  hope  that  his  sanctity, 
"moved  by  his  bowels  of  compassion,  might  dismiss  and 
annul  the  excommunication  and  censures  pronounced  upon 
the  honorable  master,  John  Huss,  and  absolve  him  from 
personal  appearance  at  Rome." 

The  archbishop  had  determined  to  pursue  a  different 
course  and  now  turned  to  Sigismund,  hoping  to  win  him  to 
his  side  and,  in  view  of  the  accession  of  influence  which  had 
accrued  to  Sigismund  by  his  recent  election  as  king  of  the  Ro- 
mans and  heir  of  the  empire,  to  break  down  the  opposition  of 
his  brother  Wenzel.^  We  would  be  offered  a  puzzHng  dilemma 
if  these  two  princes  were  proposed  for  ruler  and  we  were 
obliged  to  choose  between  them.  If  Wenzel  was  fickle  and 
weak  of  will,  he  was  at  least  under  the  powerful  control  of 
a  devoted  wife  who  had  the  respect  of  the  court.  Sigismund 
was  as  profligate  as  his  brother,  though  his  profligacy  did  not 
break  out  in  such  coarse  debaucheries,  and  he  was  also  am- 

^  Doc,  441  sq.     Mon.,  i  :  iii  sq. 

^  At  Ruprecht's  death,  1410,  the  Count  Palatine  and  the  archbishop  of 
Treves,  both  of  whom  still  acknowledged  Gregory  XII,  were  for  Sigismund  as 
king  of  the  Romans.  Sigismund's  cousin,  Jost,  margrave  of  Moravia,  re- 
ceived the  votes  of  the  archbishops  of  Cologne  and  Mainz.  On  September 
20,  1410,  Sigismund  was  elected  by  three  votes  of  the  electoral  college  and, 
ten  days  later,  Jost  by  the  four  other  votes,  including  the  vote  of  Bohemia 
cast  by  Wenzel.  The  rivalry  between  the  claimants  came  to  an  end  by  Jost's 
death,  January,  1411.  The  charge  was  made  that  he  was  poisoned  and  the 
real  or  supposed  murderer  was  quartered  alive.  Jost's  territory  of  Moravia 
was  given  to  Wenzel,  and  since  that  time  it  has  been  a  part  of  Bohemia.  Pa- 
lacky,  Gesch.,  260  sqq. 


REVOLT  AGAINST  THE  ARCHBISHOP        105 

bitious  and  ready  to  weaken  his  brother's  hold  upon  his 
subjects  by  every  available  means. 

In  turning  to  Sigismund,  Zbynek  neglected  not  the  cour- 
tesy of  writing  to  Wenzel  and  gave  as  a  reason  for  his  course 
of  action  that  Wenzel  had  refused  to  give  him  an  audience 
and  that  the  provisions  of  the  pact  had  not  been  complied 
with.  Those  who  remained  faithful  to  him  were  still  deprived 
of  their  usufructs,  their  vineyards  and  other  lawful  posses- 
sions. A  priest  was  not  handed  over  to  his  prison  who  for 
two  years  had  lived  with  a  nun.  The  parish  priest  of  St. 
Nicholas  had  been  seized  and  deprived  of  his  goods  although 
guilty  of  no  wrong.  Many  priests  had  been  forced  into  flight. 
In  one  word,  hmits  had  been  placed  to  the  full  and  un- 
hindered administration  of  his  office.  The  civil  authorities 
had  even  neglected  to  restrain  mob  violence,  which  prevented 
his  execution  of  acts  of  discipHne.  It  had  become  impossible 
for  him  to  preserve  his  honor  and  certify  to  the  pope  that 
the  persons  under  excommunication  were  guiltless  of  heresy. 

At  the  time  this  letter  was  written,  September  5,  141 1, 
the  archbishop  was  at  Leitomysl,  already  well  on  his  way  to 
Hungary  to  meet  Sigismund.  Death  struck  him  on  the  jour- 
ney three  weeks  afterward,  at  Pressburg.  It  is  probable  that, 
had  Zbynek  continued  to  Hve,  the  outcome  of  the  struggle 
between  Huss  and  the  church  authorities  would  have  been  /  >' 
no  different  from  what  it  was.  Huss  would  have  found  no 
more  reason  for  retracing  his  steps,  and  the  archbishop  could 
not  have  maintained  his  position  in  the  church  without  re- 
ceding from  the  promise  he  made  in  the  pact  of  July  3,  141 1, 
and  which,  on  reflection,  he  must  have  been  convinced  he 
had  entered  into  in  haste.  Moreover,  that  Huss  and  his  fol- 
lowers had  not  sinned,  Zbynek,  as  he  wrote  to  Wenzel,  could 
not  force  his  conscience  to  believe.  The  only  way  for  peace 
in  Bohemia  was  for  the  innovator  to  undergo  a  radical  change 
of  conviction,  and  change  front,  or  for  the  archbishop  to  fall 
in  with   the    reforming  party,  and,   renouncing  papal   alia- 


io6  JOHN  HUSS 

giance,  join  with  Wenzel,  as  later  Cranmer  joined  with  Henry 
VIII,  in  promoting  a  schism  in  the  church.  But  Wenzel 
was  a  weak  sovereign  where  Henry  VIII  was  strong,  and 
Zbynek  had  little  zeal  for  religious  reform  while  Cranmer 
had  much. 


4\ 


CHAPTER    VI 

HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE 

/  concede  that  heretics  should  be  subjected  to  force  by  the  church  that 
they  may  sincerely  accept  the  faith  and  confess  Christ  and  his  law,  for, 
although  no  one  can  believe  except  of  his  oivn  free  will,  nevertheless  a 
person  may  be  forced  to  the  physical  acts  which  may  entice  him  to  believe. 

But  it  is  one  thing  to  compel  and  another  thing  to  exterminate  or  put 
to  death.  — Huss,  ad  octo  doctores,  Mon.,  i  :  399. 

Huss's  case  had  ceased  to  be  a  local  affair.  It  had  become 
the  concern  of  Latin  Christendom.  The  papal  curia  was  being 
defied.  In  England,  what  was  transpiring  in  Bohemia  was 
closely  associated  with  its  own  discussions  over  Wyclif  and 
the  measures  which  were  there  being  pushed  against  the 
adherents  of  the  Wyclifite  heresy.  In  France,  Gerson,  the 
great  theologian  of  his  age,  was  about  to  take  up  Huss's  case 
in  a  series  of  distinct  charges  addressed  to  Konrad  of  Vechta, 
who  had  sent  him  several  of  Huss's  works.  In  Bohemia, 
Huss  and  his  fortunes  were  the  absorbing  topic  which  seemed 
to  take  precedence  of  every  other  public  question. 

Zbynek's  office  was  promptly  filled  by  the  election  of  Albik 
of  Uniczow,  a  German  of  Moravia.  He  was  the  man  the 
king  wanted  but  incompetent.  He  had  been  a  physician  and 
accumulated  a  large  fortune  by  his  practice,  which  included 
the  royal  family.  He  had  been  married  and  had  children. 
On  the  death  of  his  wife,  he  betook  himself  to  the  priesthood. 
It  was  popularly  held  that  in  securing  the  office  of  archbishop, 
he  paid  large  sums  to  the  proper  authorities  in  Prague  and 
also  to  John  XXIII.  By  reason  of  his  age  and  incompetence 
he  was  soon  superseded  by  Konrad  of  Vechta,  a  canon  of  the 
Wyssehrad. 

107 


io8  JOHN  HUSS 

At  this  time,  September,  141 1,  occurred  a  picturesque 
episode  in  the  visit  of  two  Enghshmen,  John  Stokes  and 
Hertonk  van  Glux.  It  became  the  occasion  of  identifying 
Huss  in  the  pubHc  mind  more  closely,  if  possible,  with  Wyclif 
than  before.  The  Englishmen  had  been  sent  to  Ofen  by 
Henry  IV  to  form  a  league  with  Sigismund.  Henry  IV,  had 
met  Sigismund  on  the  continent,  and  Henry  V,  in  the  will 
which  he  made  before  starting  for  Harfleur,  left  a  jewelled 
sword  to  Sigismund,  his  most  dear  brother,  "as  the  stoutest 
defender  the  church  had."^  In  1408  Sigismund  had  founded 
the  Order  of  the  Golden  Dragon  to  fight  against  all  pagans 
and  heretics,  Stokes  was  a  licentiate  of  law  of  the  university 
of  Cambridge  and  Glux  later  was  sent  on  another  mission  to 
Sigismund  by  Henry  V,  probably  1414. 

The  commissioners  were  invited  by  the  masters  of  the 
university  to  a  banquet,  but  declined  the  honor,  from  a  pur- 
pose as  it  would  seem,  to  keep  aloof  from  the  religious  dis- 
cussions which  were  rife  at  Prague.  However,  they  were  not 
successful.  John  Stokes,  who  seems  for  the  moment  to  have 
forgotten  the  methods  of  diplomacy,  in  answer  to  a  question 
gave  it  as  his  advice  to  every  one  wishing  to  retain  his  ortho- 
dox opinions  to  avoid  reading  or  studying  Wyclif's  books. 
This  advice,  he  said,  he  gave  out  of  love  to  God  and  the  love 
which  a  man  ought  to  have  to  his  neighbor,  for,  he  continued, 
he  knew  well  from  experience  the  many  evils  arising  from  such 
study. 

Such  a  statement,  though  falling  unadvisedly  from  an 
Enghshman  of  position,  Huss  could  not  let  go  unanswered. 
It  was  too  damaging  for  those  who  had  supported  Wyclif  in 
Prague  and  for  those  who  did  not  sufficiently  understand  how 
far  Wyclif  was  under  condemnation  in  his  own  land.  Huss 
caused  a  notice  to  be  affixed  to  the  ambassador's  lodging 
challenging  Stokes  to  public  debate  in  the  university  and 
quoting  the  commissioner  as  having  said  that,  "no  man, 
^  Wylie,  pp.  9-1 1.     On  Glux  and  Stokes,  see  also  Lenz,  Konig  Sigismund. 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE  POPE  109 

no  matter  how  well  disposed  he  might  be,  and  however  well 
rooted  he  might  be  in  sound  doctrine,  could  read  Wyclif 
without  becoming  involved  in  heresy."  In  a  placard  posted 
against  the  doors  of  the  cathedral,  Stokes  disowned  this  form 
of  statement  and  refused  to  enter  into  public  debate  at 
Prague  on  the  ground  that  he  was  there  as  a  member  of  an 
embassy  and  the  audience  would  be  partisan.  At  the  same 
time,  he  signified  his  readiness  to  accept  the  challenge,  pro- 
vided the  discussion  was  set  for  Paris  or  any  other  university, 
or  appointed  to  be  held  in  the  presence  of  the  curia  at  Rome. 
He  also  announced  his  willingness  to  meet  the  travelling  ex- 
penses of  any  disputant,  provided  he  were  unable  to  meet 
the  expense  himself.  He  further  stated  that,  when  he  was 
asked  in  regard  to  the  opinion  held  of  Wyclif  in  England,  he 
had  replied  that  he  was  looked  upon  there  as  a  heretic,  that 
his  works  had  been  burned  wherever  hands  could  be  laid  upon 
them,  and  that  his  opinions  had  been  officially  pronounced 
heretical. 

Once  again  John  Stokes  and  John  Huss  met  face  to  face, 
during  the  council  at  Constance,  when  Huss  disavowed  the 
statement  made  by  the  Englishman,  that  he  had  seen  in 
Prague  a  tract  ascribed  to  the  Bohemian  master  teaching 
the  remanence  of  the  bread. 

The  matter  was  not  at  an  end  with  Stokes's  departure. 
After  he  left,  Huss  made  an  elaborate  reply  at  the  university.^ 
After  detailing  the  circumstances  under  which  Stokes's  state- 
ment had  been  made,  he  stated  that  not  only  did  the  honor 
of  his  own  university,  which  had  been  using  Wyclif's  works 
for  twenty  years,  demand  a  formal  rejoinder,  but  also  the 
honor  of  Oxford  and  the  honor  of  King  Wenzel.  He  gave 
reasons  for  his  hope  that  Wyclif  was  among  the  saved.  The 
argument  was  false  that  because  Wyclif  was  held  to  be  a 
heretic  by  many  prelates  and  priests  in  England,  France, 
and  Bohemia  therefore  he  was  a  heretic — as  false  as  the 
^Replica  contra  Angliciim  J.  Stokes.    Mon.,  i  ;  135-139. 


no  JOHN  HUSS 

argument  that  because  the  Turks,  Tartars,  and  Saracens  did 
not  accept  Christ  as  God,  therefore  he  was  not  the  Son  of  God. 
The  burning  of  a  man  did  not  make  his  books  heretical  any 
more  than  the  crucifixion  made  Christ  a  heretic.  He  chal- 
,  lenged  his  adversary  to  show  that  Wyclif  had  held  a  single 
dogma  at  variance  with  the  Scriptures.  For  thirty  years, 
the  English  master  had  been  read  and  studied  in  Oxford,  so 
that  Stokes's  statement  that  no  one  had  read  and  studied  his 
books  without  being  seduced  into  heretical  paths  was  not 
true.  It  was  not  likely  that  his  philosophical  books  would 
contain  a  breath  of  heresy,  but,  even  if  some  of  Wyclif 's  books 
were  found  to  contain  heresies,  this  was  no  sufficient  reason 
why  they  should  be  burned.  Arius  and  Sabellius,  it  was  true, 
drew  their  false  tenets  from  the  Scriptures,  but  in  so  doing 
they  had  misunderstood  the  Scriptures. 

If  for  no  other  reason,  this  rejoinder  would  be  important 
for  the  three  historical  statements  it  contains  and  which  have 
already  been  adduced,  that  members  of  the  university  of 
Prague  had  been  reading  Wyclif  for  t,wenty  years,  that 
Wychf  translated  the  entire  Bible  into  English,  and  that 
Anne  of  Luxemburg,  wife  of  Richard  II,  had  taken  with  her 
to  England  the  Scriptures  in  Latin,  Bohemian  and  German. 
Huss's  words  imply  his  belief  that  Wychf  was  called  heretical 
for  having  given  the  Scriptures  in  English.  To  accuse  Anne 
of  heresy  for  having  translations  he  pronounced  a  ''Luciferan 
silliness."  Altogether,  Huss's  discussion  with  the  Enghshman, 
John  Stokes,  was  a  most  interesting  episode  in  the  literary 
history  of  the  times. 

We  now  come  to  John  XXIII's  sale  of  indulgences  in 
Prague  and  Huss's  opposition  which  it  aroused.  As  Luther 
one  hundred  years  later,  so  Huss  was  forced  into  an  attitude 
of  open  defiance  of  the  pope  by  the  sale  of  pardon  for  sin. 
No  name  of  vender  stands  out  prominently  in  Huss's  ex- 
perience as  does  the  name  of  Tetzel  in  the  case  of  the  Witten- 
berg monk.    On  the  other  hand,  Huss  at  this  point  personally 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE  POPE  in 

antagonized  the  pope,  John  XXIII,  as  Luther  did  not  antag- 
onize Leo  X  in  his  XCV  Theses  in  15 17. 

The  occasion  for  the  sale  of  indulgences  was  the  call  made 
by  John  for  a  crusade  against  Ladislaus,  king  of  Naples. 
John  issued  two  bulls  summoning  the  dioceses  of  Prague, 
Magdeburg  and  other  parts  to  a  holy  war  against  this  prince 
and  his  followers.  Ladislaus,  left  an  orphan  at  seven  by  the 
assassination  of  his  father,  Charles  of  Durazzo,  in  1384,  had 
a  stormy  career,^  His  ability  was  first  tested  in  the  assertion 
of  his  rights  against  a  rival,  Louis  of  Anjou.  In  1389,  he  was 
recognized  as  rightful  sovereign  by  Boniface  IX,  as  he  was 
later  by  Boniface's  successor,  Innocent  VII,  1404-1406,  both 
Neapolitans  like  himself;  still  later  he  was  recognized  by 
Gregory  XII.  Louis  had  the  support  of  the  Avignon  pope. 
When  Gregory  was  unable  to  maintain  himself  in  Rome, 
Ladislaus  occupied  the  city,  1407.  The  Pisan  pontiffs, 
Alexander  V  and  John  XXIII,  took  sides  against  him.  Ladis- 
laus was  defeated  in  141 1,  but  speedily  recovered  from  his 
defeat  and  received  support  from  the  faithless  John  XXIII; 
but  he  became  weary  of  his  pontifical  supporter  and,  am- 
bitious of  unifying  Italy,  he  retook  Rome,  June  8,  1413.  His 
soldiers  sacked  the  city  and  were  accused  of  stalling  their 
horses  in  St.  Peter's  church,  trampling  on  the  host  and  throw- 
ing out  relics.  Ladislaus  died  of  a  vicious  disease  or  of  poison 
a  year  later  at  Naples. 

The  two  papal  bulls  calling  for  a  crusade,  dated  September 
and  December,  141 1 2  stigmatized  Ladislaus,  "who  sacrile- 
giously called  himself  king  of  Jerusalem  and  Sicily,"  a  per- 

*  Charles  had  been  called  by  Urban  VI,  1381,  and  given  the  crown  of 
Naples  in  the  stead  of  Johanna,  who  had  supported  the  Avignon  line.  Against 
her  Urban  summoned  a  crusade.  Charles  turned  against  Urban,  who  excom- 
municated him  and  made  his  high  dignity  an  object  of  ridicule,  as  Pastor  says, 
by  going  four  times  a  day  to  the  window  and  with  sound  of  bell  and  with  burn- 
ing candles  formally  excommunicating  Charles's  army  at  Nocera.  Charles  had 
Johanna  murdered,  1382. 

2  ^neas  Sylvius  on  Ladislaus's  crusade,  chap.  35.      For  the  texts  of  the 
bulls,  see  Mon.,  i  :  212-215. 


112  JOHN  HUSS 

jurer,  blasphemer,  schismatic  and  relapsed  heretic,  the  friend 
of  heretics,  a  conspirator  against  the  papal  see  and  the  church 
and  the  supporter  of  that  son  of  malediction,  Angelo  Correr — 
Gregory  XII — heretic  and  schismatic.  Men  of  every  class  and 
station,  from  the  king  and  cardinals  down,  were  adjured  to  gird 
on  the  sword  against  the  refractory  prince.  "By  the  grace  of 
God  and  the  authority  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul"  John 
promised  to  all  who  took  the  cross,  being  penitent,  pardon 
and  augmentation  of  eternal  salvation,  and  also  to  those 
unable  to  go  on  the  campaign  who  provided  for  substitutes 
or  contributed  to  the  cost  of  the  sacred  undertaking.  The 
participants  in  this  new  crusade  were  to  have  the  same  in- 
dulgence as  those  who  went  across  the  sea  to  rescue  the  Holy 
Land.  The  crusade  was  pronounced  a  campaign  "to  protect 
the  church,  the  mother  and  teacher  of  all  the  faithful,  and 
to  defend  the  city  in  which  Divinity  wished  to  dwell — seeing 
God  had  made  it  the  foundation  for  the  militant  church  even 
through  the  shed  blood  of  the  saints  and  also  the  seat  of 
Peter." 

The  crusade  was  the  well-tried  instrument  employed  by 
popes  against  heretics  and  disobedient  princes — war  by  the 
sword  for  spiritual  offenses.  So  Innocent  III  summoned 
Christendom  against  the  Albigenses  of  Southern  France  and 
called  upon  the  king  of  France  to  bring  the  refractory  John 
of  England  to  submission.  So  Innocent  IV  spread  the  flames 
of  sedition  against  Frederick  II  and  summoned  Germany  and 
Sicily  to  revolt  against  him,  their  sovereign.  So  Urban  IV 
appealed  to  Charles  of  Anjou  to  proceed  against  Conradin,  the 
last  of  the  Hohenstaufen,  the  young  scion  of  "the  poisonous 
brood  of  a  dragon  of  poisonous  race."  And  so,  after  Huss's 
death,  popes  were  to  invoke  bloody  wars  against  the  Huss- 
ites themselves. 

In  resisting  John  XXIII's  appeal,  Huss  had  before  him 
the  example  of  Wyclif ,  who  resisted  the  crusade  of  Christian 
in  conflict  with  Christian  proclaimed  by  Urban  VI  against 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  113 

Clement  VII  of  Avignon  and  preached  in  England  by  Henry 
de  Spenser,  bishop  of  Norwich.  In  this  case,  the  pontiff  of 
the  Roman  line  promised  indulgence  for  a  year  to  all  who 
would  enlist.  The  dead  as  well  as  the  living  were  included 
in  the  benefits  which  were  to  accrue.  Wyclif 's  burning  words 
were  launched  against  the  enterprise  in  his  Cruciata,  one  of 
his  last  tracts.^  He  pronounced  it  an  expedition  for  worldly 
mastery  and  stigmatized  the  promised  indulgence  the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation  in  the  holy  place.  Not  from  this  tract,  but 
from  Wyclif's  Treatise  on  the  Church,  in  the  portion  treating 
of  indulgences,  did  Huss  draw  copious  extracts  for  his  attack. 

In  May,  141 2,  Wenzel  of  Tiem,  dean  of  Passau,  brought 
John's  bulls  to  Prague,  and  at  the  same  time  the  pallium  to 
Albik.  To  avoid  as  far  as  possible  the  scandals  which  at- 
tached to  the  sale  of  indulgences  in  Prague,  in  1393,  the  arch- 
bishop stipulated  that  the  amounts  paid,  which  on  the  former 
occasion  were  graduated  according  to  the  condition  of  the 
suppliants,  should  in  this  case  be  left  to  the  option  of  each 
individual.  Tiem  reserved  Prague  for  himself  and  placed  the 
money  chests  in  three  places,  the  cathedral,  the  Teyn  Church 
and  the  Wyssehrad.  The  beating  of  drums  aroused  the  in- 
different to  sympathy  with  the  holy  trafHc.  The  other  parts 
of  Bohemia  were  farmed  out  to  deans  and  rectors. 

In  order  to  forestall  any  opposition  Huss  might  be  pro- 
posing to  make,  Albik  summoned  him  to  his  presence  to 
meet  the  papal  delegates.  Asked  whether  he  intended  to 
obey  the  papal  summons,  he  replied  that  he  would  with  all 
his  heart  obey  the  Apostolic  mandates.  Interpreting  Apos- 
toHc  mandates  and  papal  mandates  to  be  convertible  terms, 
the  legates  exclaimed:  "See,  lord  archbishop,  he  will  obey  the 
mandates  of  our  Lord."  To  this  Huss  repHed:  "My  lords, 
understand  me;  I  said  that  with  my  whole  heart  I  am  minded 
to  obey  the  Apostolic  mandates  and  to  obey  them  in  all  points, 
but  what  I  call  the  Apostolic  mandates  are  the  doctrines  of 

^  Latin  Works,  2  :  577  sqq. 


114  JOHN  HUSS 

Christ's  Apostles,  and  so  far  as  the  mandates  of  the  Roman 
pontiff  are  in  accord  with  the  Apostolic  mandates  and  doctrine, 
that  is,  according  to  the  rule  of  Christ,  so  far  I  intend  most 
certainly  to  obey  them.  But,  if  I  find  them  to  be  at  variance, 
I  will  not  obey  them  even  if  you  put  before  my  eyes  fire  for 
the  burning  of  my  body,"  ^ 

The  excitement  over  the  bulls  in  Prague  ran  high.  The 
peddling  of  pardons  for  money  stirred  Huss's  soul  within  him, 
and  in  the  pulpit,  before  the  university  and  in  a  document 
which  he  joined  others  in  signing  in  the  Bethlehem  chapel, 
March  3,  141 2,  he  gave  no  faltering  expression  to  his  high- 
wrought  indignation. 

The  document  took  up  three  questions.  The  first,  in- 
quiring whether  the  pope  is  to  be  believed  in,  he  answered 
by  denying  that  he  is  to  be  beheved  in  in  the  sense  in  which 
we  believe  in  God,  although  we  may  believe  what  the  pope 
says  and  believe  that  he  is  pope.  The  second  question, 
whether  confession  to  the  priest  is  essential  to  salvation,  was 
answered  in  the  negative.  Here  Huss  quoted  Peter  the 
Lombard's  statement  and  also  employed  the  case  of  the 
publican  who  did  not  appear  before  a  priest  and  yet  was 
justified.  Likewise,  he  referred  to  the  cases  of  the  patriarchs 
under  the  old  law,  young  children,  the  dumb,  and  to  those 
living  in  deserts  or  languishing  in  captivity,  all  of  whom 
confess  not  to  a  priest,  and  yet,  he  said,  it  would  be  "an 
awful  and  diabolical  piety  to  condemn  them."^ 

'  Mon.,  I  :  367. 

*  In  the  matter  of  penance  a  complete  change  took  place  in  the  teaching 
of  the  church  in  the  twelfth  century.  The  theory  of  the  early  church  elabo- 
rated by  Tertullian  was  that  alms,  prayers,  and  other  works  of  penance  are 
eflacient  to  remove  the  penalty  of  sins  committed  after  baptism.  Beginning 
with  Alexander  of  Hales,  d.  1245,  confession  to  the  priest  was  made  requisite 
to  salvation.  Peter  the  Lombard,  who  lived  a  century  earlier,  had  taken  the 
opposite  view,  contrition  of  heart  and  confession  to  God  were  sufficient.  But 
Thomas  Aquinas  followed  Alexander,  and  from  that  date  four  things  were 
made  necessary  to  penance— contrition  of  heart,  confession  to  the  priest,  works 
of  satisfaction  and  the  priestly  absolution.  The  Rheims  version  of  the  New 
Testament,  1582,  translates  the  Greek  word  metanceo,  usually  "do  penance," 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  115 

The  third  question  was  as  to  whether  any  of  Pharaoh's 
army  drowned  in  the  Red  Sea  or  those  destroyed  in  Sodom 
were  saved.  Quoting  Jerome,  Huss  held  it  possible  that 
some  of  those  imfortunates  were  saved  and  that,  without 
revelation  to  the  contrary,  mortal  men  ought  not  to  affirm 
of  any  man  that  he  is  eternally  damned.  He  maintains  his 
view  also  on  the  basis  of  Christ's  words:  ''Judge  not  that 
ye  be  not  Judged."^ 

In  his  commentary  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  the  Lombard, 
Huss  does  not  make  it  quite  clear  what  his  position  was  on 
the  subject  of  priestly  absolution.  He  says,  p.  605,  that  "  God 
gave  to  priests  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing;  that  is,  of 
showing  the  men  who  have  been  bound  and  loosed,  and  that 
they  bind  when  they  impose  upon  persons  who  have  made 
confession  the  satisfaction  of  penance  and  they  loose  when 
they  remit  something  of  that  satisfaction,  or  they  bind  when 
they  place  under  excommunication  and  loose  when  they 
release  from  excommunication."  This  power  is  like  the  power 
which  the  priest  had  in  the  Old  Testament  in  cures  of  leprosy 
— "they  adjudge  and  show  sins  remitted  of  God." 

Huss's  theological  colleagues  at  the  university  were  now  ^ 
arrayed  solidly  against  him.     In  formal  meeting  they  charged 
him  with  proclaiming  that  the  papal  bulls  were  an  evident 
token  that  antichrist  was  fully  come,  and  the  pope  was  to  be    1 
resisted  as  the  chief  enemy  and  adversary  of  Christ.    Huss's  J 
announcement  that  he  would  discuss  the  subject  at  the  uni- 
versity was  met  on  the  part  of  faculty  with  a  petition^  to  the 

though  not  uniformly,  and  by  so  doing  puts  into  the  New  Testament  an  in- 
stitution of  the  later  church  and  mistranslates  the  Greek.  The  change  to  the 
later  mediaeval  view  was  helped  on  by  a  tract  foisted  upon  Augustine  in  the 
twelfth  century,  de  vera  el  falsa  pcnitenlia,  which  Gratian  incorporated  in  his 
Decretwn. 

'  Here  Huss  approached  closely  to  the  ground  occupied  a  hundred  years 
later  by  Zwingli,  who  extended  the  benefits  of  the  atonement  to  good  heathen 
like  Socrates  and  Aristides  and  was  strongly  inclined  to  extend  it  to  all  the 
children  of  heathen  dying  in  infancy,  if  he  did  not  actually  do  so.  The  ground 
on  which  he  based  this  hope  was  God's  predestination,  which  is  entirely  of 
free  grace. 

'  Doc,  448-451- 


ii6  JOHN  HUSS 

archbishop  to  prohibit  the  discussion.  Huss's  statement 
about  antichrist  was  ascribed  to  his  dependence  upon  Wyclif. 
The  Wyclifite  articles  had  led  to  bitter  dispute  and  discords 
not  only  in  the  university  but  among  the  people.  The  peti- 
tion laid  down  the  principle  that  the  pope  has  the  right  to 
give  full  remission  of  all  sins — and  that  he  might  call  upon 
the  people  to  defend  the  Roman  city  against  heretics  and 
schismatics.  The  document  also  forbade  bachelors  of  theology 
to  discuss  the  papal  bulls.  Stephen  Palecz,  dean  of  the 
faculty,  was  one  of  the  signers. 

In  spite  of  this  resistance  of  the  theological  faculty,  the 
discussion  was  held  in  the  university,  June  7,  141 2.  The 
attendance  was  large.  The  rector,  Marcus  of  Koniggratz, 
presided.  Huss's  treatment  was  embodied  in  one  of  his  most 
elaborate  writings  and  is  equal  to  any  of  them  in  clearness  and 
force  of  statement.  It  is  declared  by  Loserth  to  stand  as  the 
pre-eminent  work  among  his  writings  and  to  be  in  its  style 
a  model  of  acute  and  telling  argument.^  This  judgment,  how- 
ever, is  not  to  be  taken  as  inconsistent  with  the  author's 
estimate  of  the  Treatise  on  the  Church,  which,  Loserth  says, 
has  "always  been  regarded  as  Huss's  most  important  piece 
of  writing  by  friends  and  foes  alike."  Here  are  set  forth  at 
length  Huss's  views  on  indulgences  and  the  temporal  authority 
of  the  pope. 

In  his  opening  words  he  declares  that  the  honor  of  God, 
the  good  of  the  church  and  his  own  conscience— /Jro^na  con- 
scientia — were  involved  in  his  attitude  to  the  transaction 
of  John  XXIII.  He  protested  that  he  wished  to  say  nothing 
contrary  to  the  law  of  Christ,  which  was  the  narrow  way  of 
life  and  the  truth.  Against  the  fallacy  of  giving  obedience 
to  John's  bulls,  he  brought  considerations  from  the  hmited 
authority  of  the  papal  office,  from  the  wrong  of  using  bad 
measures  for  the  defense  of  the  church,  and  from  the  error 
that  gifts  of  money  constitute  no  valid  claim  to  plenary  ab- 
*  WicliJ  and  Hus,  p.  141.     Huss's  Treatise,  Mon.  1  :  215-235. 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE   POPE  117 

solution  from  the  penalty  and  guilt  of  sin — absolutio  plenaria 
a  culpa  et  poena.  Acts  not  done  from  love  of  man  cannot 
have  God's  approval,  and,  it  is  probable,  that  a  decree  re- 
sulting in  the  killing  of  human  beings  does  not  proceed  from 
the  love  of  Christ,  nor  can  the  impoverishment  of  a  people 
to  provide  the  means  for  such  killing  be  consonant  with 
God's  will. 

As  for  the  pardon  of  sins,  the  Christian  priest  enjoys  the 
right  to  absolve  from  penalty  and  guilt,  but  he  can  actually 
absolve  only  with  the  aid  of  a  special  revelation.  Wise  priests 
absolve  only  on  condition  that  the  sinner  feels  sorrow  for 
his  sin,  promises  to  sin  no  more,  and  puts  his  confidence  in 
God's  mercy,  Ezek.  18:  21,  22.  No  one  is  capable  of  receiv- 
ing indulgence  unless  he  be  disposed  thereto  by  God's  grace. 
Pardon  God  alone  can  grant. 

As  for  getting  money  for  wars,  it  behooves  the  spiritual 
powers  to  employ  spiritual  weapons,  not  carnal;  offer  prayer, 
issue  writings  to  convince  the  heart,  and,  if  necessary,  suffer 
death.  "Vengeance  is  mine,  I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord." 
Oh,  that  the  Roman  pontiff  might  accept  and  follow  in 
humility  this  rule  of  Paul!  Authority  is  not  given  Peter's 
vicar  and  bishops  to  draw  the  material  sword.  Their  weapons 
should  be  tears  and  prayers.  Nor  should  the  pope  authorize 
war  for  what  seems  to  be  to  his  own  advantage  in  securing 
and  confirming  secular  power.  These  positions  Huss  proved 
from  Scripture  and  quotations  drawn  from  Augustine,  Jerome, 
Gregory  and  St.  Bernard.  Conceding  that  the  church,  which 
is  the  body  of  the  faithful — universitas  fidelium — has  the 
two  swords,  the  spiritual  and  the  material,  he  insists  that 
the  church  consists  of  three  parts — the  soldiery,  the  clergy, 
and  the  people — and  that  the  material  sword  is  to  be  wielded 
by  that  part  of  the  church  which  is  made  up  of  the  soldiery. 
And  as  the  church's  spiritual  sword  is  not  to  be  used  by  the 
soldiery  of  this  world  in  the  same  way  as  it  is  used  by  the 
priests,  so  in  like  manner  the  material  sword  is  not  to  be  used 


< 


ii8  JOHN  HUSS 

by  the  spiritual  leaders  of  the  church  to  fight  against  the 
bodies  of  men  but  by  the  secular  soldiery,  whose  chief  busi- 
ness it  is  to  defend  the  law  of  Christ  and  his  church.  The 
distinction  between  the  soldiery — militia — and  the  clergy 
is  clearly  made,  as  also  the  distinction  between  the  two 
swords.  The  spiritual  sword  is  the  Word  of  God,  Eph.  6. 
The  material  sword  is  referred  to  in  Romans  13  :  4.  "He 
beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain:  for  he  is  a  minister  of  God,  an 
avenger  for  wrath  to  him  that  doeth  evil."  He  who  uses 
the  spiritual  sword  does  not  draw  the  blood  of  the  sinner. 

From  Deut.  17:8  the  people  in  their  ignorance  have  the 
idea  that  all  commands  emanating  from  the  pope  are  to  be 
obeyed.  They  are  certainly  wrong.  The  pope  is  not  to  be 
obeyed  when  he  calls  for  a  crusade  for  the  extermination  of 
his  enemies,  whom  he  has  before  damned.  Assuredly  Christ 
did  not  proceed  upon  this  principle.  He  rebuked  James  and 
John  for  wanting  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven  upon  his 
enemies.  Let  the  pope  ask  himself  why  he  summons  Chris- 
tians to  exterminate,  not  Samaritans  but  fellow  Christians. 
Would  that  the  clergy  might  make  the  life  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles  their  example,  and  by  patience  and  forbearance 
follow  the  Lamb  who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world !  It 
behooves  not  the  priest  to  strive  or  enter  into  litigation. 

The  barter  of  pardons  is  contrary  to  the  Scriptures.  Peter 
did  not  sell  Simon  Magus  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  The  sale 
of  remissions  for  sin  by  the  papal  commissioners  is  simony. 
Sins  are  to  be  remitted  without  money  and  without  price. 
Prayer,  fasting,  and  other  good  works  the  bulls  make  no  men- 
tion of — only  money.  Why  does  the  pope  not  have  refuge 
in  prayer  rather  than  in  gold  and  silver?  Christ  prayed 
for  Peter  that  his  faith  fail  not.  And  it  is  clear  that  he  taught 
Peter,  and  through  him  his  vicars,  to  have  recourse  in  times 
of  necessity  to  God  by  prayer  and  not  to  depend  on  money 
or  corporal  battle.  Would  that  the  pope  followed  Christ  in 
interceding  for  his  enemies,  saying  in  the  name  of  the  church, 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE  POPE  119 

"My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,"  by  doing  good  and  bless- 
ing those  that  speak  evil  of  it!^  The  pope  pretends  to  for- 
give sins  in  his  own  name.  The  chief  power  of  the  Apostles 
was  preaching  the  Gospel.  Even  upon  the  penitent  the  pope 
cannot  confer  forgiveness.  Did  not  Peter  refuse  to  grant  it  to 
Simon  Magus,  bidding  him  pray  to  God  that  the  thought  of 
his  heart  might  be  forgiven?  It  is  in  ignorance  that  the  pope 
offers  absolution  without  making  an  exception  even  of  the 
reprobate.     In  so  doing  he  places  himself  above  Christ. 

In  order  to  grant  indulgences  discriminatingly,  the  pope 
would  be  obliged  in  all  cases  to  know  that  God  approves  of 
his  act,  but  such  knowledge  he  often  lacks  from  want  of 
revelation  and  Scripture  precept.  How  can  he  sell  what 
God  does  not  want  sold?  In  offering  pardons  he  arrogates 
to  himself  the  prerogative  which  is  God's  alone,  for  indulgence 
is  the  remission  of  an  injury  done  to  God  himself,  and  this 
power  he  cannot  commit  to  a  creature.  If  the  pope  knows 
who  is  to  be  absolved,  then  he  actually  knows  who  the  pre- 
destined are.  But  that  he  knows  as  little  as  he  knows  the 
hour  when  Peter  died  and  the  day  of  future  judgment.  If 
he  is  capable  of  dispensing  with  the  divine  sentence,  then 
he  infinitely  exceeds  Peter.  However,  he  is  neither  im- 
peccable nor  infallible.  The  assertion  that  the  pope  cannot 
err  is  not  only  false  but  blasphemous,  for  in  case  he  could  not 
err  he  would  be  sinless,  as  was  Christ — ipse  papa  non  potest 
errare,  est  non  solum  falsa,  sed  et  hlasphema.  At  the  highest, 
his  act  is  nothing  more  than  the  announcement  which  one 
makes  who  is  appointed  by  God  as  a  herald.  It  is  not  con- 
trary to  the  faith  to  hold  that  popes  have  gone  to  perdition. 

The  papal  gift  of  indulgence  is  not  only  a  presumption, 
being  against  Scripture  and  the  reason  of  things,  but,  as  a 
matter  of  experience,  it  is  found  to  be  absurd.  A  man  ap- 
prised of  the  bull,  be  he  parricide,  thief,  adulterer,  or  simoniac, 
if  he  confess  sins,  though  he  be  ever  so  deficient  in  his  con- 
'  Mon.,  I  :  220,  222. 


I20  JOHN  HUSS 

trition,  provided  he  gave  money  for  this  crusade — on  him 
the  pope  would  confer  indulgence  from  guilt  and  penalty. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  man  not  apprised  of  the  bull,  though 
he  keep  God's  commands  and  have  only  venial  sins,  if  he 
be  contrite  and  confess  and  yet  does  not  give  money,  he  will 
not  receive  indulgence  or  pardon.  At  death,  the  former 
goes  at  once  to  heaven  because  he  is  absolved  from  the 
penalty  of  purgatory  and  from  guilt;  the  other  into  purga- 
torial pains. 

As  for  a  pope's  giving  indulgence  to  the  dead,  he  might, 
if  he  had  this  power,  abolish  purgatory  itself.  For  he  might 
absolve  all  in  purgatory  and  confer  perpetual  pardon  and 
grace.  There  would  be  nothing  to  prevent  this  result  but 
perchance  his  own  envy  and  neglect.  In  fact,  he  might  keep 
all  from  going  to  purgatory  and,  in  that  case,  make  of  no 
effect  the  church's  prayers  and  its  other  offices  for  the  dead. 
At  death  every  one  would  immediately  fly  to  heaven,  having 
no  need  of  the  church's  suffrages.^ 

The  pope's  bulls  absolve  equally  all,  no  matter  what  their 
sins  may  be — murder  or  venial  faults.  It  is  marvellous  that 
the  pope  does  not  insert  in  his  bull  the  quality  and  degree 
of  the  sins  to  be  forgiven,  as  he  inserts  the  amount  of  money  to 
be  paid.  If  one  should  unjustly  put  a  thousand  men  to  death, 
and  another  sin  only  venially,  both  being  contrite  would 
be  released  from  penalty  and  guilt.  And  the  latter,  if  he 
had  more  money  than  the  other,  would  be  expected  by  the 
commission  to  give  more  than  the  former,  and  for  no  other 
imaginary  reason  than  the  appetite  for  money.    This  whole- 

^  Mon.,  I  :  228.  Wyclif,  de  Ecclesia,  570  sq.,  speaks  of  canonists  and 
theologians  who  held  "  that  the  pope  has  power  to  grant  indulgences  to  an  in- 
finite number  of  persons  for  an  infinite  period  of  time  and  that  therefore  his 
power  is  infinitely  greater  than  the  power  of  a  bishop,  who  can  give  indul- 
gences only  for  forty  days."  Having  such  power,  "what  excuse  has  he  that  he 
does  not  release  from  eternal  damnation  his  neighbor,  whom  he  ought  to  love 
as  himself,  and  yet  without  sufficient  grounds  omits  so  to  do?  "  Shall  a  man 
be  excused  who  is  commanded  even  to  pull  his  brother's  ox  on  the  Sabbath 
day  out  of  the  pit  if  he  neglects  to  free  his  brother's  soul  from  hell  ? 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  121 

sale  remitting  from  penalty  and  guilt  savors  of  a  deluge  of 
satisfaction  for  offenses;  so  that  the  more  people  a  man 
might  put  to  death  the  more  would  God  and  man  be  under 
obligation  to  pardon.  The  man  enlisting  in  the  crusade 
might  kill  priests  and  even  papal  commissioners  themselves 
and  appropriate  their  money,  and  yet  he  would  come  under 
the  terms  of  the  indulgence.  However,  Huss  does  not  know 
whether  in  the  last  case  the  pope  would  allow  the  validity 
of  the  indulgence  unless  the  moneys  were  restored. 

The  pope's  call  to  a  crusade,  involving  the  kilHng  of  Chris- 
tians under  Ladislaus's  rule  and  their  spoliation  is  plainly 
against  Christ's  word  to  Peter  to  put  up  his  sword  and 
the  rebuke  of  the  disciples  who  called  for  vengeance  upon 
the  Samaritan  village.  Therefore,  it  deserves  no  obedience. 
The  Scriptures  give  not  a  single  case  of  a  saint  saying:  "I 
have  forgiven  thy  sin,  I  have  absolved  thee."  Nor  can  the 
case  of  a  saint  be  discovered  who  gave  indulgence  for  a  given 
number  of  years  or  days  from  the  penalty  and  guilt  of  sin. 

Huss  closes  his  fiery  tract  by  comparing  a  pontiff  who 
uses  the  Scriptural  power  in  an  unwarranted  way  to  a  tyrant. 
One  is  to  be  disobeyed  as  well  as  the  other.  If  the  papal  ut- 
terances agree  with  the  law  of  Christ,  they  are  to  be  obeyed. 
If  they  are  at  variance  with  it,  then  Christ's  disciples  must 
stand  loyally  and  manfully  with  Christ  against  all  papal  bulls 
whatsoever  and  be  ready,  if  necessary,  to  endure  malediction 
and  death.  When  the  pope  uses  his  power  in  an  unscriptural 
way,  to  resist  him  is  not  a  sin,  it  is  a  mandate.^ 

^  Mon.,  I  :  234.  Huss  makes  large  use  of  Wyclif  in  this  tract,  but  it  is  an 
exaggeration  when  Loserth,  p.  141,  says:  "From  the  definition  of  the  indul- 
gence onward  everything  is  the  property  of  Wyclif.  The  most  weighty  parts  are 
derived  from  that  chapter  of  Wyclif's  de  Ecclesia  which  treats  of  indulgences 
and  is  taken  word  for  word."  Huss's  definition  of  an  indulgence  is  verbally 
the  same  as  Wyclif's  with  some  added  words  simplifying,  Mon.,  i  :  216,  also 
p.  377;  de  Ecclesia,  p.  549;  and  in  many  of  the  important  points  the  treat- 
ments agree.  Huss,  however,  has  much  material  of  his  own  pertaining  to 
the  general  subject  as  well  as  bearing  directly  upon  the  contents  of  John 
XXIH's  bulls.  He  refers  more  frequently  to  the  Scriptures  than  does  Wyclif, 
and  most  aptly,  using  the  quotations  with  great  effect  in  the  cases  cited  and 


122  JOHN  HUSS 

The  discussion  which  the  indulgence  campaign  called 
forth  not  only  constitutes  one  of  the  more  important  events 
in  Huss's  career,  but  is  one  of  the  sources  from  which  we 
derive  a  satisfactory  conception  of  his  real  views.  The  issue 
was  distinctly  stated  and  Huss's  exact  meaning  not  clouded 
by  any  of  that  uncertainty  which  arose  from  the  repeated 
charges  which  he  made  at  Constance,  that  his  writings  were 
misquoted  and  his  views  not  accurately  stated  by  his  accusers. 
From  the  standpoint  of  the  teaching  of  the  church  in  that 
age,  he  was  certainly  a  heretic.  He  had  chosen  anotheT 
foundation  for  his  theology  than  the  mediasval  and  papal 
system.  He  planted  himself  firmly  on  the  Scriptures  as 
the  supreme  authority  in  matters  of  faith  and  conduct.  He 
held  the  teaching  of  free  grace  and  Christ's  immediate  for- 
giveness, and  thus  set  himself  against  the  mediaeval  dogma 
of  penance  and  the  necessity  of  priestly  intervention.  He 
denied  the  pope's  infallibility.  He  insisted  that  pardon  for 
sin  was  not  to  be  bought  with  money,  all  papal  bulls  to  the 
contrary.  He  enunciated  the  principle  of  the  lordship  of 
conscience.  He  asserted  preaching  to  be  the  chief  function 
of  the  priesthood. 

A  most  important  result  of  the  discussion  which  John's 
bulls  aroused  was  the  definite  detachment  of  old  friends  at 
the  university.  The  other  members  of  the  faculty  of  theology 
took  sides  against  him  by  giving  their  active  support  to  the 
bulls  and  definitely  repudiating  the  teachings  of  Wyclif. 
Stanislaus  of  Znaim  and  Michael  Palecz,  friends  of  his  student 
days,  were  from  this  time  on  arrayed  against  Huss,  and  be- 
came his  determined  accusers  before  the  church  authorities. 
At  first  Palecz  had  found  palpable  errors  in  Tiem's  articles  of 
absolution,  but  he  underwent  a  change  of  mind.     Palecz,  Huss 

the  case  of  the  publican.  To  many  things  in  Wyclif  s  treatment  he  makes  no 
reference  as  to  the  thesaurus  meritorum,  p.  572.  As  I  shall  have  occasion  to 
say  under  the  head  of  the  de  Ecclesia,  Huss's  treatment  is  free  from  the  biting 
sarcasm  which  runs  through  Wyclif  when  he  treats  of  the  pope  and  the  hierarchy, 
and  Huss's  method  is  better  adapted  to  reach  a  popular  audience. 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  123 

called  "his  revered  teacher,"  "his  former  friend"  and,  "my 
chief  companion"  and  Stanislaus  "my  teacher  from  whom 
I  have  learned  many  good  things."  But  when  truth  was  at 
stake,  he  preferred  it  to  both.  On  this  point  he  wrote:  "Palecz 
is  my  friend,  truth  is  my  friend,  and  if  both  remain  my  friends, 
it  is  just  to  give  the  place  of  honor  to  the  truth."  ^ 

Another  who  had  taken  strong  sides  against  him,  and  a 
bitter  foe  to  the  end,  was  Michael  Deutschbrod,  formerly 
parish  priest  in  Prague,  known  as  Michael  de  Causis,  or  the 
Pleader,  from  an  honor  conferred  upon  him  by  John  XXIII 
as  advocate  in  matters  of  the  faith.  As  the  representative 
at  Rome  of  the  party  hostile  to  Huss,  he  needed  not  the 
special  urging  of  priests  in  Prague  to  proceed  with  vigor  in 
securing  a  drastic  papal  handling  of  the  Prague  situation,  and 
especially  of  that  son  of  iniquity — filius  iniquitatis—'H.uss. 

Among  the  friends  who  stood  by  him  was  the  one  who 
was  to  follow  him  as  a  martyr  at  the  stake,  Jerome  of  Prague. 
Jerome  followed  Huss's  address  at  the  university  with  an 
address  of  his  own  which  produced  such  an  impression  upon 
the  student  body  that  he  was  popularly  regarded  as  having 
carried  o£f  the  honors  of  the  day.  He  was  placed  under 
excommunication  as  an  advocate  of  Wyclif,  and  he  and 
others  were  thrown  into  prison.  Common  fame  had  it  that 
Jerome  advocated  the  errors  of  Wychf,  not  only  in  Prague, 
but  in  Heidelberg,  Vienna,  and  Hungary.^ 

At  this  juncture  the  popular  excitement  found  dramatic 
expression  in  a  procession  headed  by  Wok  of  Waldstein,  one 
of  the  king's  favorites,  followed  by  a  noisy  crowd  of  students. 
In  the  centre  was  a  wagon  on  which  a  student  stood  clad  as  a 
harlot,  with  strings  of  bells  around  his  neck  and  written  docu- 

^  Amicus  Palec,  arnica  Veritas,  ntrisque  amicis  existentibus  sanctum  est  prceho- 
norare  veritaiem.  Mon.,  i  :  318,  330,  331.  Super  IV.  Sent.,  20.  Huss  dated 
Palecz's  estrangement  from  this  time,  ascribing  it  definitely  to  the  difference 
over  the  sale  of  indulgences.  Indiilgentiarum  venditlo  me  ab  isto  doctore  primum 
separavit. 

"^  Doc,  416  sqq.,  429. 


124  JOHN  HUSS 

ments  at  his  feet.  The  procession  moved  from  the  cathedral 
to  the  Moldau  and  then  across  the  bridge  to  the  old  city. 
The  books,  thrown  under  a  gallows,  were  committed  to  the 
flames.  In  this  act,  which  was  intended  to  be  a  parody  of  the 
burning  of  Wyclif's  books,  Jerome  took  a  prominent  part. 
An  account  has  been  left  by  one  of  the  students  who  took 
part,  Martin  Lupac,  d.  1468.^ 

The  preachers  of  pardons  had  no  easy  time  of  it.  Pub- 
lic ministrations  were  interrupted  by  acts  of  violence.  The 
rioters,  cleric  and  laymen,  men  and  women,  were  thrown  into 
prison.  The  king,  many  of  whose  courtiers  were  in  sympathy 
with  the  disturbances,  was  forced  to  take  note  of  them. 
When  they  broke  out  he  was  at  his  summer  residence  at 
Zebrak.  Thither  he  called  the  magistrates  of  the  three 
Prague  towns  and  ordered  them  to  punish  with  death  all 
offending  in  any  way  against  the  papal  bulls  and  those 
preaching  the  indulgences.  In  spite  of  this  apparently  de- 
cisive attitude  on  the  part  of  her  royal  consort,  the  queen 
continued  to  attend  services  at  the  Bethlehem  chapel  and 
Wok  remained  unpunished. 

The  riots  culminated  in  the  execution  of  three  of  the 
rioters,  Martin,  John,  and  Stafcon,  written  also  Stasek,  the 
last  a  shoemaker  from  Poland.  Martin  had  cried  out  in  one 
of  the  churches  that  the  pope  had  shown  himself  to  be  anti- 
christ by  announcing  a  crusade  against  Christians.  John 
threw  a  vender  of  indulgences  out  of  a  convent.  Stafcon 
had  also  protested  in  the  church  against  the  sale  of  pardons. 
Vivid  accounts  of  these  facts  and  the  scenes  that  followed 
Huss  gives  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church  and  in  his  Bohemian 
sermons.  In  the  hope  of  making  a  lasting  impression,  the 
magistrates  summoned  the  populace  to  be  present  at  the 
execution  set  for  July  11,  141 2.  Knowing  that  the  three 
prisoners  were  sentenced  to  suffer  for  the  views  he  had  pro- 
mulged,  Huss,  accompanied  by  other  masters  and  followed 

1  Palacky,  Gesch.,  278. 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE  POPE  125 

by  a  large  body  of  students,  hastened  to  the  city  hall,  pro- 
tested to  the  magistrates  in  behalf  of  the  accused,  and  an- 
nounced himself  willing  to  suffer  in  their  stead,  whose  alleged 
guilt  was  more  his  than  theirs.  On  receiving  assurance 
that  they  would  receive  no  harm,  Huss  returned  to  his  house. 
But  several  hours  afterward  the  unhappy  men  were  dragged 
from  prison  and  hurried  ojff  to  their  death. 

From  fear  of  the  growing  crowds,  the  executioner  did 
his  work  before  the  usual  place  appointed  for  criminal  exe- 
cutions was  reached,  and  the  public  crier  called  out  that  all 
who  might  be  guilty  of  a  like  offense  would  receive  the  same 
punishment.  A  number  of  voices  were  heard  exclaiming 
that  they  were  willing  to  suffer  and  they  were  forthwith 
arrested.  White  sheets  provided  by  a  woman  were  thrown 
over  the  bodies  of  the  dead,  and  the  throng  of  students, 
led  by  John  of  Giczin,  lifted  them  up  and  carried  them  to 
the  Bethlehem  chapel,  chanting  the  solemn  chant,  ''These 
are  holy."  There  they  were  buried  by  Huss.  In  derision, 
the  chapel  was  thenceforward  called  the  Chapel  of  the  Three 
Martyrs.  1 

The  tap-root  of  these  disturbances  was  the  Wyclifian 
scheme,  and  it  was  recognized  that,  until  it  was  cut  out,  the 
restoration  of  quiet  could  not  be  looked  for  in  the  city.  At 
the  king's  order,  the  university  again  sat  in  judgment,  July 
10,  141 2,  upon  the  XLV  Articles,  with  the  aim  of  reviewing 
the  original  decree  of  1403,  which,  it  will  be  remembered,  for- 
bade any  one  to  affirm  in  private  or  in  public  these  Wyclifian 
principles.  Now,  eight  of  the  masters,  including  Palecz, 
Stanislaus  and  Andrew  of  Broda,  passed  a  sentence  stigmatiz- 
ing under  three  heads  the  articles  as  heretical,  false,  or  scandal- 
ous. Among  the  alleged  heretical  articles  were  the  denial  of 
transubstantiation  and  that  the  pope  is  not  the  immediate 
vicar  of  Christ.    The  decree,  issued  in  1403,  forbade  any  one 

'  Palacky,  Gesch.,  Ill,  pt.  I,  p.  280.  ^neas  Sylvius,  35,  also  says  the  three 
men  were  buried  in  Bethlehem  chapel  and  their  bodies  looked  upon  as  sacred 
relics.    For  the  account  in  the  Bohemian  sermons,  Doc,  725  sq. 


126  JOHN  HUSS 

to  hold  or  preach  any  of  the  articles  on  pain  of  being  held  a 
heretic  and  called  upon  the  king  to  execute  civil  penalties 
even  to  exile  from  the  Bohemian  kingdom.  To  these  XLV 
Articles  were  appended  six,  or  perhaps  nine,  others,  pro- 
nouncing the  penalty  due  heresy  upon  all  who  did  not  hold 
to  the  sacraments  and  the  power  of  the  keys  in  the  sense  held 
by  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  who  denied  that  reverence 
should  be  paid  to  relics  or  asserted  that  "the  great  anti- 
christ predicted  in  Holy  Writ"  had  already  come.  The 
same  punishment  was  invoked  upon  those  who  affirmed  that 
customs  of  the  church  not  plainly  contained  in  the  Scriptures 
have  no  binding  force,  that  priests  do  no  more  than  declare 
the  penitent  confessor  absolved,  and  that  the  pope  has  no 
right  to  call  upon  Christians  to  fight  against  their  fellow 
Christians  in  defense  of  the  apostolic  see  and  solicit  moneys 
for  that  purpose  in  return  for  absolution. 

Accepting  this  sweeping  sentence,  the  king  had  the  reso- 
lution to  order  those  holding  the  XLV  Articles  banished  from 
the  realm.  At  the  same  time  he  bade  the  doctors  attempt 
to  compose  the  difficulty  by  peaceable  measures.  At  the 
call  of  the  city  magistrates  a  week  later,  masters  of  the  uni- 
versity and  clergy  met  at  the  city  hall  and  reaffirmed  the 
condemnation  of  the  articles.  At  the  same  time,  however, 
other  masters,  bachelors,  and  many  students  met  at  the 
university  building  and  protested  the  articles  had  been  con- 
demned without  reasonable  examination.  In  an  elaborate 
defense  made  at  the  university,  Huss  vindicated  at  least  five 
of  them.^  No  article,  he  affirmed,  should  be  condemned 
which  is  not  explicitly  or  by  fair  implication  condemned  in 
the  Scriptures.  He  contended  that  those  who  cease  preaching 
the  Word  of  God  or  give  up  hearing  it  preached  out  of  regard 
for  a  sentence  of  excommunication  will  be  found  traitors  at 
the  day  of  judgment,  that  every  deacon  and  priest  has  the 
right  to  preach  irrespective  of  a  permission  from  the  apos- 

^  Mon.,  I  :  139-169. 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  127 

tolic  see  or  a  bishop,  that  tithes  are  alms,  that  no  one  in 
mortal  sin  may  validly  administer  the  sacraments  of  baptism, 
the  Lord's  Supper,  absolution,  and  ordination,  and  that  the 
king  may  deprive  priests  unfaithful  in  their  duties  of  their 
worldly  support.  No  pope  or  bishop  or  other  mortal,  he 
insisted,  has  the  authority  to  stop  priest  and  deacon  from 
preaching.  A  king  has  not  the  right  to  forbid  his  subjects 
giving  alms.  No  more  has  a  spiritual  superior  the  right  to 
forbid  the  giving  of  the  spiritual  alms  of  the  sermon  to  those 
who  are  spiritually  needy  and  thirsty. 

In  an  audience  before  the  king  at  Zebrak,  Huss,  in  vindica- 
tion of  his  views,  offered  to  undergo  a  test  on  condition  that 
each  of  the  other  eight  doctors  did  the  same,  each  of  them  as 
well  as  himself  submitting  to  the  ordeal  of  burning  as  heretics 
in  case  of  failure  to  make  good  his  position.  All  of  the  eight 
were  present  at  the  audience  and  refused  to  yield  to  Huss's 
suggestion.  The  situation  was  aggravated  rather  than  ap- 
peased by  the  audience. 

Huss's  unequivocal  opposition  to  what  was  the  tradi- 
tional view  of  the  church  came  out  if  possible  more  distinctly 
than  before  in  his  reply  to  the  writing  of  the  eight  doctors.^ 
It  must  be  remembered  that  the  eight  had  declared  them- 
selves in  favor  of  John  XXIII's  bulls  of  indulgence.  In  this 
document  the  chief  question  which  Huss  dwelt  upon  was 
the  question  of  papal  authority,  which  he  treated  chiefly  in 
the  light  of  the  New  Testament  practice.  He  elaborated 
the  essential  principles  laid  down  in  the  writings  against 
John's  bulls  already  adduced  and  took  up  the  arguments  of 
the  doctors  one  by  one.  He  made  a  clear  distinction  be- 
tween mandates  issuing  from  the  Apostles  and  commands 
contained  in  papal  bulls.  Bulls  are  only  to  be  obeyed  so  far 
as  they  conform  to  the  Gospel  of  Christ  and  the  epistles  of 
the  Apostles.  Bulls  had  often  been  recalled  or  superseded 
or,  in  case  of  a  pope's  death,  allowed  to  lapse.    He  had  heard 

'  Responsio  ad  scriptum  odo  doclorum,  Mon.,  i  :  366-408. 


128  JOHN  HUSS 

that  the  French  and  English  would  not  admit  John's  bulls 
against  Ladislaus.  The  papal  legates  who  were  commissioned 
to  carry  them  to  Apulia  did  not  dare  to  show  themselves 
in  that  territory.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Bohemians,  less 
bold  than  Balaam's  ass,  had  admitted  the  bulls  and  allowed 
indulgences  to  be  offered.  In  the  papal  sale  of  indulgences  in 
1393,  under  Boniface  IX,  absolution  from  the  penalty  and 
guilt  of  sin  was  offered  only  for  definite  amounts  prescribed 
by  confessors,  namely,  upon  the  basis  of  the  cost  the  pur- 
chaser or  his  family  would  be  at  to  go  to  Rome  on  foot  or 
on  horse  during  the  jubilee  year.  Certainly  any  man  who 
had  any  knowledge  of  the  law  of  Christ  would  say  that  this 
practice  was  in  contempt  of  this  law,  for  Christ  plainly  taught : 
''Freely  ye  have  received,  freely  give." 

The  pope's  fallibility  was  proved  from  the  experiences  and 
words  of  the  Apostles.  On  his  way  to  Damascus,  Paul  was 
stopped,  and  the  papers  made  out  by  the  Sanhedrin  rendered 
invalid  by  revelation.  The  pope  had  likewise  given  letters, 
citing  and  excommunicating  men  and  women  who  followed 
Christ's  pure  law  and  delivering  them  over  to  the  secular 
arm.  Such  bulls  should  be  resisted  not  only  by  the  faculty 
of  the  university,  but  by  the  king  and  his  council.  In  their 
messages,  Peter,  Paul,  John  and  James  sent  salutations  and 
encouragements  to  the  churches,  not  sentences  of  condem- 
nation. Peter  called  the  Roman  see  not  Rome,  but  Babylon. 
"The  church  that  is  in  Babylon  saluteth  you,"  he  wrote. 
He  did  not  say,  "give  me  money."  He  did  not  curse  and 
excommunicate  those  who  preached  the  Gospel,  but  said: 
"Grace  be  with  you  and  peace  be  multiplied."  Christ's 
messages  did  not  stigmatize  those  who  persecuted  him  and 
crucified  him.  And  yet  the  papal  bull  stigmatized  Ladislaus 
and  his  friends  as  perjurers,  schismatics,  blasphemers,  the 
defenders  of  heretics  and  conspirators  against  the  church 
and  called  for  their  punishment.  Christ  taught  that  men 
should  bless  those  that  curse  them  and  love  their  enemies. 


HUSS  RESISTS  THE  POPE  129 

The  priest  indeed  can  absolve  and  give  indulgence,  but 
only  as  God  has  absolved  before  and  as  the  priest's  ab- 
solution is  in  accord  with  the  law  of  Christ.  Even  laymen 
may  remit  sins,  as  appears  from  the  Lord's  Prayer.  In  taking 
this  position,  Huss  follows  Wyclif 's  de  Ecdesia.  He  condemns 
the  popes  for  wearing  the  garments  of  Ceesar  and  a  golden 
crown.  People  wishing  to  get  under  the  shadow  of  Peter  to- 
day pass  into  the  presence  of  papal  pomp  and  attire.  Peter 
did  not  forbid  Ananias's  and  Sapphira's  interment  as  the  pope 
forbids  burial  for  those  who  refuse  to  obey  his  bulls.  Such 
is  the  contrast  of  the  lives  of  popes,  cardinals,  and  clerics  to 
the  lives  of  the  Apostles  that,  if  they  should  try  to  cast  out 
demons  according  to  the  power  given  by  Christ,  the  demons 
would  reply:  ''Jesus  I  know  and  Peter  and  Paul  and  the 
other  Apostles  I  know,  but  who  are  you?"  As  for  heresy, 
nothing  is  so  fatal  to  the  good  cause  as  hypocrisy.  Evil  that 
is  manifest  flees  from  the  light  and  hides  itself.  Heresy  is 
pernicious  in  that  many  are  led  away  by  it,  but  it  is  also 
useful  because  the  faithful  are  tried  by  it  and  are  led  to 
isolate  themselves  from  the  unbeUeving.  Heresy  is  an  aping 
of  the  true  doctrine  and  the  ministries  of  the  Gospel,  and  as 
a  monkey  has  all  of  the  members  of  a  human  being  and  in 
all  things  imitates  him,  so  heresy  has  all  the  rites  of  the  church 
and  yet  is  not  of  the  church. 

The  power  to  remit  sin  it  was  customary  to  argue,  Huss 
goes  on  to  say,  from  the  rite  of  baptism,  in  which  the  priest 
gives  baptismal  grace  and  delivers  from  all  pain  of  hell  and 
purgatory,  so  that  in  case  the  baptized  child  die,  incurring 
no  post-baptismal  sin,  it  goes  immediately  to  heaven.  Huss's 
reply  is  that,  in  case  of  necessity,  laymen  and  even  women  may 
baptize,  but  that  it  would  be  misleading  to  conclude  from 
this  practice  that  laymen  also  have  the  power  to  give  remis- 
sion from  all  sin.  The  form  of  the  statement  "we  absolve" 
belongs  properly  not  to  the  pope,  but  only  to  God  himself. 
The  pope  dare  use  these  words  only  in  a  conditional  sense: 


I30  JOHN  HUSS 

"We  absolve  provided  the  sinner  repent  and  does  the  works 
of  repentance." 

^ -^  Huss  then  takes  up  again  the  inhibition  of  preaching 
in  chapels,  first  pronounced  by  Alexander  V,  and  the  waging 
of  hostilities  with  the  church's  sanction,  legalized  by  John 
against  Ladislaus.  The  contention  of  the  eight  doctors  was 
that  behind  him  the  pope  had  examples  in  the  New  Testament 
such  as  the  Israelites'  war  against  Amalek,  but  for  the  case  in 
hand  this  historic  example  was  insufhcient,  for  God  never  au- 
thorized war  against  Christians.^  The  pope  and  clergy  had  no 
business  with  the  material  sword.  Christ  bade  Peter  put 
it  into  the  sheath.  John's  mihtant  bulls  were  also  contrary 
to  the  precedents  of  church  practice.  The  canon  law  laid 
down  the  rule  that  "no  cleric  should  pronounce  a  judgment 
of  blood  or  carry  it  out  or  be  present  when  it  is  carried  out." 
It  is  inconsistent  for  the  pope  to  wish  to  put  men  to  death 
on  the  plea  that  they  are  not  submissive  to  papal  authority 
or  deprive  the  pope  of  temporalities,  for  he  does  not  put  the 
Jews  to  death  who  deny  Christ's  law.  The  reason  is  easily 
given.  The  Jews  did  not  deprive  the  pope  of  temporahties, 
although  they  were  accomphces  of  Ladislaus. 

Manifest  heretics  are  to  be  coerced  by  the  church  in 
matters  of  the  faith,  but  in  such  a  way  that  they  may  be 
induced  truly  to  believe  in  Christ  and  in  his  law,  for  no  one 
can  believe  except  of  his  own  free  will — nemo  potest  credere 
nisi  volens.  Nevertheless,  a  man  can  be  forced  to  the  out- 
ward acts  which,  as  the  needle  carries  the  thread,  may  entice 
to  real  faith.  The  Lord  bade  them  "to  compel  them"  to  go 
to  the  marriage  feast,  but  to  compel  is  one  thing  and  to 

*  Huss  does  not  take  up  wars  against  the  Saracens.  In  preaching  the 
second  crusade,  1147,  and  in  his  de  Militibus  Templi  Bernard  justified  such 
wars  on  the  ground  that  the  Saracens  held  the  Holy  Land.  It  was  better,  he 
said,  that  pagans  should  be  put  to  death  than  that  the  rod  of  the  wicked  should 
rest  upon  the  lot  of  the  righteous.  The  righteous  fear  no  sin  in  killing  the  enemy 
of  Christ.  Christ's  soldier  can  securely  kill  and  more  safely  die.  When  he 
dies,  it  profits  himself.  When  he  slays,  it  profits  Christ.  It  seems  strange  that, 
so  far  as  I  know,  Huss  nowhere  refers  to  the  papal  crusades  against  the  Wal- 
denses  and  Cathari. 


HUSS   RESISTS  THE  POPE  131 

put  to  death  is  quite  another.  Here  Huss  has  in  mind  the 
famous  words  of  Augustine  uttered  during  his  controversy 
with  the  Donatists.  After  moral  measures  of  persuasion 
were  found  to  be  of  no  avail,  the  great  Father  recommended 
the  use  of  physical  force.  He  did  not  at  any  time  go  so  far 
as  to  recommend  the  death  penalty  for  heresy  and  insub- 
ordination to  the  church,  but,  as  Neander  showed,  the  counsel 
easily  leads  to  the  use  of  the  death  penalty,  and  Augustine's 
words  were  interpreted  by  Thomas  Aquinas  and  the  other 
Schoolmen  to  justify  and  teach  the  death  penalty  for  heresy. 

In  favor  of  the  papal  right  to  declare  war  against  heretics, 
Huss  continues,  the  doctors  had  not  only  adduced  the  case 
of  Israel's  treatment  of  Amalek  and  the  cases  of  Samuel  and 
Agag,  Paul  and  Elymas,  and  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  but 
had  used  such  passages  as  John  14  :  12:  ''The  works  that  I 
do  shall  ye  do  also;  and  greater  works  than  these  shall  ye  do." 
They  had  also  used  Christ's  treatment  of  the  traffickers  in 
the  temple.  Granting,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  that  the 
pope  is  endowed  of  God  with  the  same  authority  as  Peter, 
when  he  calls  for  war,  he  ought  in  this  case  to  start  with 
those  who  rob  the  church,  the  simoniacs,  which  would  mean 
starting  at  his  own  household.  It  is  evident,  however,  that 
the  pope  is  not  omniscient  and  does  not  know  everything 
that  would  be  of  profit  to  the  church.  He  might  act  in  all 
cases  as  Peter  did,  if  he  were  in  all  cases  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost.  As  for  the  death  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  it  was 
not  Peter  but  God  who  felled  them  to  the  ground,  and  the 
purpose  was  to  strengthen  the  faith  of  the  church.  By  pro- 
phetic endowment  Peter  discovered  their  deceit  and  prophesied 
the  death  of  Sapphira.  He  was  not  acting  in  his  own  in- 
terests, but  in  God's  interest,  when  he  did  what  he  did  on 
that  occasion. 

The  armor  with  which  the  pope  should  be  endued  is 
described  in  the  last  chapter  of  the  Ephesians.  There  he 
may  read  of  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  a  weapon  meant  for  de- 
fense, as  the  Apostle  indicates,  and  which  was  nothing  more 


132  JOHN  HUSS 

nor  less  than  the  Word  of  God.  The  weapons  there  described, 
the  pope  and  bishop  should  use,  accompanying  their  use  with 
prayer  and  tears.  As  for  the  summons  of  Pope  Leo  IV  to 
the  people  to  enlist  against  the  Saracens,  that  was  a  summons 
for  the  people  to  defend  themselves  against  their  enemies, 
who  were  threatening  Rome.  But  it  was  a  very  different 
thing  for  the  faithful  to  gird  themselves  with  the  sword  for 
the  extermination  of  Christians  and  for  the  pope  to  do  the 
same  for  the  sake  of  earthly  riches.  The  most  a  bishop  has 
the  right  to  do,  in  the  case  of  a  righteous  war,  is  to  consult 
with  the  princes  and  to  exhort  them  to  fight  for  their  subjects. 
Moreover,  princes  and  the  people  are  under  no  obligation 
to  obey  their  spiritual  superiors  except  in  so  far  as  the  com- 
mands proceed  according  to  God's  law.  Even  under  such 
circumstances  alone  were  the  Jewish  people  obligated  to  obey 
their  rulers,  the  scribes  and  Pharisees. 

These  fervid  writings,  full  of  argument.  Scripture  and 
feeling,  called  forth  by  John  XXIII's  bull  summoning  Bo- 
hemia to  war  against  Ladislaus,  show  that  Huss  had  removed 
far  from  the  mediaeval  position  that  the  church  has  an  ab- 
solute right  over  those  whom  it  has  baptized  and  to  see  to 
it  that  heretics  are  put  out  of  the  world — exterminated,  to 
use  Huss's  own  word.  The  foundations  of  the  church,  Huss 
insisted,  are  spiritual.  Its  purpose  is  to  persuade  the  sinner, 
to  correct  his  errors  and  to  heal  his  wounds,  and  not  to  put 
upon  him  any  physical  compulsion,  unless,  perchance,  such 
a  measure  be  fairly  adapted  to  win  him  to  faith  in  Christ 
and  the  Gospel.  In  the  Treatise  on  the  Church  he  said,  as 
plainly  as  words  could  state  it,  that  the  heretic  should  not 
receive  capital  punishment.  To  save  the  body  of  the  faith- 
ful by  putting  heretics  to  death  is  a  principle  the  church  has 
no  authority  to  act  upon,  unless  in  such  cases  she  is  evidently 
inspired  so  to  do.  Her  duty  is  to  recall  the  errant  and  save 
the  sinner  by  preaching.  Faith,  to  be  acceptable  and  real 
faith,  must  be  a  voluntary  habit  of  the  soul. 


CHAPTER  VII 
HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL   FROM   PRAGUE 

Nomen  hceretici  pra  omnibus  malis  nominibus  abhorrentium. — The 
Counsel  of  the  Eight  Doctors  of  the  Univ.  of  Prague,  Feb.  6,  1413. 

The  name  of  heretic  is  to  be  abominated  above  all  other  evil 
names. 

The  sentence  of  aggravated  excommunication  was  await- 
ing Huss  and  the  papal  interdict  was  about  to  be  laid  upon 
the  city  of  Prague.^  The  announcement  of  the  latter  bull 
was  followed  by  Huss's  retirement  from  the  city  and  his 
absence  for  a  period  of  two  years,  October,  1412-October,  1414. 

Many  supporters  as  Huss  had,  the  larger  part  of  the  clergy 
still  held  back  from  his  movement  or  openly  declared  against 
him.  The  old  order  had  been  tried  for  centuries  and  had 
prevailed  against  all  attacks  from  heretics  and  princes.  The 
conservative  habit  of  mind  clings  to  approved  institutions. 
It  is  not  so  much  its  guilt  that  it  does  not  appreciate  the  neces- 
sity for  change  or  discern  the  signs  of  the  coming  time.  It  is 
given  only  to  a  few,  moved  by  strong  and  independent  con- 
victions and  endowed  with  prophetic  insight,  to  see  beyond 
the  order  which  from  their  earliest  knowledge  has  been 
around  about  them.  Even  John  the  Baptist  wavered,  though 
he  was  appointed  to  be  the  forerunner.  Later,  another  John, 
John  of  Staupitz,  halted  while  Luther  went  forward.  To 
those  bold  leaders  who  have  opened  out  new  paths,  that 
prove  to  be  good  paths,  across  the  oceans  and  toward  new 

*  In  his  Address  to  the  German  Nobility,  V:  17,  Luther  speaks  of  'ecclesi- 
astical suspensions,  irregularities,  aggravations,  reaggravations,  and  deposi- 
tions, thunderings,  lightnings,  cursings,  damnings,  and  what-not — all  these 
should  be  buried  ten  fathoms  deep,  that  their  very  name  may  be  remembered 
no  more.' 

133 


134  JOHN  HUSS 

horizons  of  thought  and  feeHng,  human  society  is  under  an 
unspeakable  debt.    Theirs  is  the  cause  of  progress. 

To  the  latter  group  Huss  belongs.  In  his  case  his  former 
colleagues  not  only  failed  to  approve  of  the  wisdom  of  his 
course  in  threatening  to  break  with  the  old,  but  it  is  quite 
possible  they  also  felt  a  certain  amount  of  jealousy  for  the 
popular  feeling  in  his  favor  and,  as  Huss  charged,  fear  of  of- 
fending their  superiors.  In  the  case  of  Luther,  the  element  of 
rivalry  does  not  seem  to  have  been  an  appreciable  factor  in  the 
opposition  to  him  when  he  entered  upon  his  Reformatory 
career.  No  intimate  friends  turned  against  him  and  took  a 
positively  hostile  attitude  toward  him. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  year  141 2,  Huss  was  attacked 
by  one  whom  he  designates  "a.  hidden  assailant  of  the  truth 
or  an  inquisitor."  In  his  spirited  reply  entitled  Against  the 
Hidden  Adversary — a  writing  which  played  a  part  in  the  coun- 
cil of  Constance — Huss  took  occasion  to  defend  his  course  in 
attacking  the  vices  of  the  clergy.  The  charges  made  by  his 
opponent  were  first,  that  Huss  by  his  preaching  had  dis- 
credited the  law,  and  second,  that  he  was  destroying  the 
influence  of  the  priesthood.  Huss  replied  that  he  was  not 
attempting  to  discredit  the  priesthood  but  to  abash  vicious 
and  unfaithful  priests.  In  taking  this  course,  he  was  following 
Christ,  who  wept  over  Jerusalem,  which  was  later  destroyed 
by  Titus.  Christ  entered  into  the  temple,  rebuked  those 
who  sold  doves  and  cast  them  out.  Charles  IV,  king  of 
Bohemia,  had  protected  the  Word  of  God  by  restraining 
and  reprimanding  insolent  and  unfaithful  priests.  It  is  for 
kings  to  purge  the  church  as  Nebuchadnezzar  released  the 
three  young  men  from  the  fire.  There  is  an  order  of  priest- 
hood which  continues  in  heaven;  it  consists  of  all  those  who 
make  an  offering  of  themselves  unto  the  Lord.  This  priest- 
hood, as  well  as  the  priests  who  ofiEiciate  at  the  altar  in  this 
world,  do  justly  in  rebuking,  evil  and  unfaithful  priests. 

Upon  the  whole,  the  papal  court  of  the  Pisan  line,  next 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       135 

to  maintainmg  its  own  existence,  had  no  case  to  attend  to 
comparable  in  importance  with  the  refractory  movement  in 
Bohemia.  It  was  kept  well  informed  of  what  was  happening. 
Michael  de  Causis  was  in  Rome,  pleading  against  the  preacher 
of  Bethlehem  chapel.  The  hostile  wing  of  the  Prague  clergy- 
was  insisting  that  Huss  be  punished  to  the  extent  of  the  law. 
A  communication  which  it  forwarded  to  the  pope  in  the  be- 
ginning of  141 2,  branded  Huss  as  a  heretic,  a  despiser  of  the 
keys,  and  a  WycHfist.'  It  declared  that  "every  heretic  and 
schismatic  deserves  a  place  with  the  devil  and  his  angels  in 
the  flames  of  eternal  fire."  Many  men  in  high  position  and 
also  an  infinite  number  of  women  had  been  seduced  to  beheve 
the  XLV  Articles  of  Wychf.  John  was  entreated  to  protect 
the  sheep  against  ravening  wolves  and,  if  necessary,  by  turn- 
ing Huss  and  his  sympathizers  over  to  the  civil  arm.  Thus 
the  pernicious  seeds  might  be  prevented  from  germinating 
before  it  became  impossible  to  exterminate  them.  Infamous 
though  John  XXIII  was  rumored  to  be,  a  very  devil  of  a 
cardinal — diavolo  cardinale — the  communication  addressed 
him  as  Most  blessed  father,  most  righteous  and  merciful  prince 
of  fathers. 

Ill  treatment  had  been  meted  out  to  Jesenicz  and  the 
other  pleader  of  Huss's  case  at  Rome.  They  had  been  thrown 
into  prison,  although,  as  Huss  wrote,  they  were  free  from  all 
crime.  His  case,  which  had  been  transferred  from  Colonna 
and  put  into  the  hands  of  four  cardinals,  was  now  again 
committed  to  a  single  prelate,  Peter  Stefaneschi,  cardinal 
of  St.  Angelo.2  The  curial  proceedings  culminated  in  the  ag- 
gravated excommunication  pronounced  by  this  cardinal,  that 
is,  the  excommunication  pronounced  by  Colonna  reaffirmed 
with  emphasis.  It  bound  Huss  in  the  tightest  grip  of  the 
greater  anathema.  Under  threat  of  excommunication,  the 
faithful  were  instructed  to  avoid  the  contumacious  son  of  the 
church  in  all  places,  public  and  private,  at  meat  and  drink,  in 
*  Doc,  457-461.  *  Doc,  461-464. 


136  JOHN  HUSS 

conversation,  in  buying  and  selling.  They  were  to  refuse  him 
all  hospitality,  fire,  and  water.  Should  Huss  after  twenty- 
three  days  persist  in  his  contumacy,  then  in  all  churches, 
chapels,  and  convents,  on  all  festival  days  and  Sundays,  by 
the  extinguishing  of  tapers  and  casting  them  to  the  ground, 
he  was  to  be  pronounced  "excommunicate  aggravate,  and 
reaggravate."^  Every  locality  where  he  might  tarry  was 
to  be  placed  under  the  interdict  during  the  term  of  his  so- 
journing there  and  for  one  natural  day  more.  Divine  services 
were  to  be  held  behind  closed  doors  and  the  eucharist  dis- 
tributed only  to  the  sick. 

Should  Huss  happen  to  die  while  bound  by  the  censure, 
church  sepulture  was  to  be  denied  him  and,  if  he  were  already 
in  his  grave  when  the  sentence  was  pronounced,  his  body 
was  to  be  disinterred  "on  account  of  his  rebellion  and  con- 
tempt of  the  Apostolic  mandates  as  unworthy  of  church 
burial."  In  token  of  eternal  curse  three  stones  were  ordered 
thrown  against  the  house  where  he  might  be  dwelling.  Thus 
the  sentence  would  be  repeated  which  God  had  meted  out 
to  Dathan  and  Abiram,  who  were  swallowed  up  alive  of  the 
earth.  By  speaking  or  standing  or  rising  up,  by  walking  or 
riding,  by  salutation  or  association,  by  eating  or  drinking, 
by  cooking  or  laboring,  by  buying  or  selling  by  furnishing 
clothes  or  shoes,  by  giving  drink  or  water  or  any  of  the  other 
necessities  of  life,  by  offering  consolation  or  any  help  what- 
soever, all  the  faithful  of  Christ  were  enjoined  from  having 
any  part  or  lot  with  the  unfortunate  man,  and  any  one  pre- 
suming to  do  the  same  was  also  to  share  in  the  anathema- 
tization. Thus  Cain's  curse  was  put  upon  Huss  as  far  as 
it  was  in  human  power  to  do  it.    He  was  a  vagabond  on 

^  The  greater  and  lesser  anathema,  according  to  Gregory  IX,  differed  by 
the  ritual  solemnity  with  which  they  were  pronounced.  See  Wetzer  and 
Welte  under  Anathema.  All  writers  on  canon  law,  such  as  P.  Hergenrother, 
pp.  566  sq.,  do  not  make  this  distinction.  Huss,  de  ecclcs.,  chap.  XXII,  defines 
the  minor  excommunication  as  the  deprivation  of  the  sacraments;  major  as  the 
separation  from  the  communion  of  the  faithful. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       137 

the  earth,  deprived  of  all  means  of  livelihood  and  of  all 
human  aid. 

Sentences  as  destitute  of  common  human  mercy  and 
equally  or  more  violent  in  expression  had  been  pronounced 
before.  Popes  had  felt  free  to  invoke  the  terrors  of  this  world 
and  to  extend  furious  execrations  to  the  life  that  is  to 
come.  So  the  bull  of  Clement  VI  against  Lewis  the  Bavarian 
in  1346  ran:  "Let  his  going  out  and  his  coming  in  be  cursed. 
May  the  Lord  strike  him  low  with  madness  and  bUndness 
and  fury  of  mind.  May  the  heavens  send  forth  against  him 
their  thunderbolts;  And  may  the  wrath  of  God  omnipotent 
and  his  blessed  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  burn  itself  against 
him  in  this  world  and  the  world  to  come.  May  the  earth 
fight  against  him  and  the  ground  open  and  swallow  him  up 
aHve.  May  all  the  elements  contend  against  him,  and  all  the 
saints  who  are  at  rest  put  him  to  confusion  and  in  this  world 
fall  upon  him  with  their  vengeance."  The  bull  blasphemously 
damned  the  emperor's  house  to  desolation  and  his  children 
to  exclusion  from  their  abode,  and  it  invoked  upon  the  father 
the  curse  of  beholding  with  his  own  eyes  the  destruction  of 
his  children  by  their  enemies.^  How  far  different  was  the 
spirit  of  Huss  who,  putting  aside  the  fearful  examples  of 
divine  punishment  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament  as  of  a 
nature  suited  exclusively  to  God's  immediate  execution, 
dwelt  upon  the  mercy  of  the  Gospel,  Christ's  refusal  to  grant 
the  petition  of  the  disciples  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven, 
and  who  again  and  again  quoted  as  a  rule  of  conduct  for 
prelatical  action  and  all  daily  Hfe  the  divine  words:  "Judge 
not  that  ye  be  not  judged."  ^ 

All  evils  that  could  hurt  Huss  in  body  and  soul  were 
invoked  against  him  except  the  blow  of  the  sword  or  con- 
suming fire,  a  sentence  for  which  the  church  was,  in  theory 
at  least,  dependent  upon  the  magistrate.  Huss  was  a  heretic, 
and  in  due  time  the  church  would  find  opportunity  to  turn 

1  Mirbt,  p.  167.    Schaff,  V,  2  :  98  sq.  *  Mon.,  1  :  139,  etc. 


138  JOHN  HUSS 

him  over  to  the  civil  authorities  for  the  punishment  to  which 
the  custom  of  centuries  had  consigned  heretics.  Sentences, 
Hke  this  one  against  Huss,  have  been  justified  on  the  plea 
that  they  are  beneficial  for  the  church  in  preserving  the  flock 
from  infection.  The  individual's  rights  in  the  sight  of  God 
as  the  supreme  judge  over  hving  and  dead  are  made  subject 
to  the  decision  of  an  organization  called  the  church,  or  rather 
to  a  restricted  official  group  which  is  regarded  as  its  rep- 
resentative. It  was  Huss's  merit,  as  it  was  Wyclif's  merit 
before  and  Luther's  one  hundred  years  later,  to  fight  against 
this  fell  theory  and  to  hazard  his  life,  as  they  did  theirs,  for 
the  Christian  theory  which  prevails  to-day.  In  the  works 
already  cited,  Huss  contended  manfully  for  the  rights  of 
the  individual,  as  we  shall  also  find  him  doing  in  his  Treatise 
on  the  Church  and  in  other  statements  to  the  end  of  his  fife. 
The  time  was  now  at  hand  for  him  to  assert  these  rights  for 
himself  with  all  his  might  against  the  powers  of  the  church 
which  were  against  him. 

From  the  sentence  of  aggravated  excommunication,  which 
deprived  him  of  everything  but  bare  existence,  Huss  ap- 
pealed to  the  supreme  judge,  Jesus  Christ — ad  supremum 
judicem  appellavi}  The  appeal  is  introduced  by  a  confession 
of  God  as  one  in  essence  and  three  in  person  and  of  Jesus 
Christ,  who  suffered  an  unjust  and  bitter  death  to  redeem 
from  condemnation  those  elected  from  before  the  foundation 
of  the  world — Jesus  Christ,  who  left  to  his  disciples  the  highest 
example  of  suffering  and  the  lesson  that  in  memory  of  him 
they  should  commit  their  cause  to  an  omnipotent,  omnis- 
cient, and  all-gracious  Lord.  Huss  begged  for  the  divine 
help  and  compassion  in  the  midst  of  his  enemies  who  were 
speaking  and  plotting  ill  against  him  and  who  were  declaring 
that  God  had  forsaken  him.  He  recalled  the  examples  of 
John  Chrysostom  and  Andrew  of  Prague,  who  had  appealed 
from  ecclesiastical  decisions,  and  especially  the  example  of 
^  Mon.,  I  :  305,  325,  393.     For  the  text  of  the  appeal,  Doc,  192,  464-466. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM   PRAGUE       139 

Robert  Grosseteste  of  Lincoln,  who  had  appealed  from  the 
pope  to  the  "supreme  and  most  righteous  judge  who  is  not 
deceived  by  false  witnesses  or  moved  by  fear."  His  friends 
of  Bohemia  of  high  and  low  estate,  conjoined  with  him  in  the 
papal  fulmination,  he  reminded  of  the  busy  activity  of  Michael 
de  Causis  at  the  curia.  He  also  reminded  them  of  John 
XXIII's  refusal  during  a  period  of  two  years  to  grant  a 
hearing  to  his  procurators  and  the  pope's  neglect  to  give  at- 
tention to  the  sealed  testimony  of  the  university  and  to  his 
own  reasons  for  not  heeding  the  citation  and  appearing  at 
Rome.  Moved  not  by  contumacy  but  by  prudential  concern, 
he  had  declined  to  appear,  his  very  life,  as  it  seemed,  being 
threatened  were  he  to  enter  upon  the  journey.  The  canonical 
course  for  a  man  accused  of  an  offense,  so  he  urged,  was  that 
he  should  be  examined  at  the  place  where  the  offense  was 
committed  and  be  tried  in  an  impartial  court.  In  closing 
his  protest,  he  commended  himself,  a  bachelor  of  theology  of 
the  university  of  Prague,  priest  and  authorized  preacher  at 
Bethlehem  chapel,  to  "the  most  righteous  judge,  Jesus 
Christ,  who  knows,  protects,  and  judges  the  righteous  cause 
of  every  man  perfectly,  makes  it  known  and  most  surely 
rewards  his  servants." 

Huss  did  not  appeal  to  a  general  council,  because,  as  he 
wrote  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church,  the  calling  of  a  council 
involved  delay  and  also  because  a  council  was  an  uncertain 
mode  of  relief.  Consequently,  finding  his  appeal  from  Alex- 
ander V  to  his  successor  of  no  avail,  he  appealed  to  Christ. 

The  interdict  which  probably  was  received  in  Prague  in 
August,  141 2,  brought  with  it  fierce  penalties  which  at  once 
began  to  be  felt.  Priests  refused  to  administer  the  sacraments, 
even  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  and  to  accord  the  rites  of 
sepulture.  Some  of  the  king's  courtiers,  it  is  said,  joined 
in  burying  the  dead.  As  for  its  effects  upon  Huss,  even  his 
old  friends,  Palecz  and  Stanislaus  of  Znaim,  made  attacks 
upon  him  in  the  pulpit.     Stanislaus,  preaching  before  Duke 


I40  JOHN  HUSS 

Ernest  of  Austria  in  the  church  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin,  in- 
veighed against  the  five  Wyclifite  articles  defended  by  Huss; 
and  in  St.  Gallus,  Palecz  declared  Huss  to  be  a  worse  heretic 
than  either  Sabellius  or  Arius,  for  he  dared  to  intrench  him- 
self behind  the  Scriptures.  Palecz  also  used  as  an  argu- 
ment against  the  Hussites  their  alleged  timidity  and  boasted 
of  the  confidence  and  boldness  of  the  other  party.  We  can 
go,  he  said,  "with  our  faith  wherever  we  choose,  but  they 
dare  not  travel  abroad,  for  in  Germany  or  before  the  Roman 
curia,  if  they  did  not  renounce  their  faith,  they  would  be 
burned." 

Still  another  bull  was  forthcoming,  which  ordered  Huss 
seized  and  delivered  up  to  the  archbishop  of  Prague  or  the 
bishop  of  Leitomysl  to  be  condemned  and  put  to  death.  The 
Bethlehem  chapel  was  ordered  razed  to  the  ground  as  a  nest 
of  heresy.  A  mob  of  German  citizens  who  had  taken  sides 
against  Huss,  and  of  Czechs  led  by  a  Bohemian,  Chotek, 
furnished  themselves  with  swords  and  other  weapons  and 
proceeded  to  the  Bethlehem  chapel  with  the  purpose  of 
executing  the  papal  order,  but  their  attempt  was  foiled  by 
the  congregation,  which  at  the  time  was  assembled  for  service.^ 
At  a  formal  meeting  in  the  town  hall,  Germans  and  some 
Bohemians  voted  to  execute  the  pope's  fulmination  against 
the  chapel,  but  the  majority  of  the  Bohemians  present  an- 
nounced themselves  against  it.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Hussites  were  not  to  be  easily  subdued.  They  gained  the 
victory  at  the  university  by  the  election  of  Christian  of 
Prachaticz  as  rector.  The  election  was  carried  through  in 
the  face  of  the  combined  resistance  of  the  theological  masters. 
Prachaticz  was  a  devoted  friend  of  Huss  and  so  remained  to 
the  end.  Some  of  Huss's  letters  giving  the  deepest  insight 
into  his  convictions  were  addressed  to  this  noble  man. 

Sophia,  the  queen,  also  remained  steadfast  and  continued 
to  attend  the  services  at  the  chapel.    John  of  Jesenicz,  who 

^  Doc,  727  sq. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM   PRAGUE       141 

had  escaped  from  his  Italian  jail,  was  seized  and  imprisoned 
on  his  return  to  Prague.  Released  through  the  intervention 
of  the  university,  he  held  a  public  dispute  in  its  halls,  Decem- 
ber 18,  1412,  seeking  to  prove  that  the  sentences  against 
Huss  were  without  legal  basis.  Huss  reports  that  both 
John  XXIII  and  the  cardinals  received  horses,  silver  cups, 
and  other  gifts  as  bribes  from  the  party  hostile  to  him,  and 
intimates  that  one  reason  the  case  went  against  him  at  Rome 
was  that  Jesenicz  declined  to  bribe  the  papal  court. ^ 

It  was  evident  that  the  king  was  inclined  to  support  the 
excommunicated  preacher,  but  to  have  done  so  openly  would 
have  been  to  defy  the  papal  power.  It  would  have  meant 
for  his  realm  civil  war  and  for  himself  quite  probably  the  loss 
of  his  crown.  Popes  were  prepared  for  such  emergencies. 
They  had  deposed  Henry  IV,  Frederick  II,  John  of  England, 
Lewis  the  Bavarian,  and,  later,  Elizabeth  herself,  and  Wenzel 
had  none  of  the  strength  of  these  strong  personalities.  As 
the  electors,  at  the  pope's  demand,  had  chosen  a  rival  emperor 
in  the  past,  so  at  this  juncture  they  would  probably  again 
have  heeded  a  papal  mandate  to  supersede  the  Bohemian 
king  if  one  had  been  given.  In  fact,  all  that  was  required  was 
for  them  to  recognize  his  brother  Sigismund,  already  elected 
heir  to  the  throne.  For  such  an  issue  that  prince  was,  no 
doubt,  quite  ready.  On  a  former  occasion  he  had  seized  his 
brother  at  the  appeal  of  the  barons.  Much  more  would  he 
be  ready  to  seize  him  in  deference  to  a  call  from  the  spiritual 
head  of  Christendom. 

Had  Wenzel  been  as  strong  and  cautious  a  character  as 
was  later  Frederick  the  Wise  of  Saxony,  he  might  have  become 
the  patron  of  a  radical  and  permanent  reformation,  as  the 
elector  became  the  patron  of  the  Protestant  movement  by 
preventing  any  violence  being  done  Luther  by  the  Roman 
party  and  by  insisting  that  Luther  should  have  a  fair  hearing. 

It  was  a  friendly  act  for  Wenzel  when  he  called  upon 

*  Mom.,  I  :  408-420.     Doc,  726. 


142  JOHN  HUSS 

Huss  to  withdraw  from  the  city,  which  was  suffering  from 
the  woes  of  the  interdict.  From  the  standpoint  of  expediency, 
it  was  also  a  wise  thing  for  the  king  to  give  Huss  this  counsel. 
It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Wenzel  had  any  very  deep 
religious  convictions,  although  he  may  have  felt  the  justice 
of  Huss's  attacks  on  local  clerical  conditions.  Huss  complied 
with  the  king's  wishes.  He  left  the  city,  October,  141 2,  and 
his  semi-voluntary  exile,  interrupted  by  occasional  visits  to 
Prague,  continued  to  October,  1414,  when  he  started  on  his 
journey  to  Constance.  He  found  refuge  and  hospitality  in  the 
castle  of  Kozi  hradek,  belonging  to  John  of  Austi,  in  Southern 
Bohemia.  People  were  soon  asking  where  Huss  was,  though 
they  had  no  thought  that  he  was  dead,  as  Albrecht  Diirer 
and  others  thought  of  Luther  after  his  seizure  at  the  Wartburg. 
By  withdrawing  from  Prague,  Huss  saved  the  city  from 
the  continued  pressure  of  the  interdict.  It  must  be  recalled 
that  this  extreme  papal  ban  was  equivalent  to  a  religious 
starvation.  Huss's  removal  by  death  or  by  exile  was  the 
indispensable  condition  of  its  suspension.  His  enemies  at 
once  took  advantage  of  his  retirement  to  make  the  damaging 
charge  that  he  had  been  banished  by  the  king  or  the  still 
more  damaging  charge  that  he  had  fled  from  fear.  In  the 
earlier  list  of  charges  brought  against  him  at  Constance, 
1414,  was  the  charge  "that  he  was  expelled  from  Prague 
on  account  of  rebellion  and  disobedience."^  There  was  some 
ground  for  the  charge  of  banishment,  provided  a  king's  counsel 
is  to  be  treated  as  tantamount  to  law,  but  no  official  order 
was  issued.  Huss's  course  afterward  became  the  occasion 
of  much  trouble  to  his  conscience,  whether  he  had  done  right 
or  not  in  leaving  the  city.  Writing  to  the  Praguers  at  the 
close  of  141 2,  he  declared  that  he  withdrew  of  his  own  will,  and 
in  so  doing  felt  he  was  following  Christ's  example.  In  justifi- 
cation of  his  course  he  quoted  the  passages,  "They  sought  to 
take  him  and  he  went  forth  out  of  their  hands,"  John  10  :  39, 

'  Doc,  46,  203. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       143 

and  "Jesus  walked  no  more  openly  among  the  Jews,  but 
departed  thence  into  the  country  near  to  the  wilderness," 
John  II  :  54- 

Albik,  who  at  this  juncture  retired  from  the  see  of  Prague, 
was  succeeded  by  Konrad  of  Vechta.  The  retiring  prelate 
was  provided  with  the  provostship  of  the  Wyssehrad,  a  rich 
office,  and  made  titular  archbishop  of  Caesarea.  He  bought 
a  house  which  he  occupied  with  his  aunt  and  two  daughters 
until  his  death  in  1427.  His  successor,  who  was  inducted 
into  the  office,  July,  14 13,  in  his  latter  days  espoused  Huss- 
itism. 

The  Bohemian  heresy  was  fast  becoming  a  byword, 
darkening  the  fair  fame  of  the  land  throughout  the  Christian 
world. ^  In  the  hope  of  removing  the  causes  of  "the  pestif- 
erous religious  dissensions  among  the  clergy,"  and  acting 
in  connection  with  the  bishops  of  Olmiitz  and  Leitomysl, 
Wenzel  called  an  extraordinary  national  synod,  which  met 
in  Prague,  February  6,  1413. 

The  synod  had  laid  before  it  memorials  from  the  theological 
faculty  of  the  university  and  from  Huss,  setting  forth  the 
conditions  on  which  religious  peace  might  be  re-established. 
Huss  was  prevented  by  the  sentence  of  excommunication 
from  being  present,  and  his  position  was  defended,  as  seems 
probable,  by  Jesenicz  and  also  by  Jacobellus,  of  whom  we 
shall  hear  more. 

The  memorial  of  the  theological  faculty,  drawn  up  by 
Stanislaus  of  Znaim  and  Palecz,  took  the  position  that  the 
church's  official  decisions  are  final.-  It  was  out  of  the  prov- 
ince of  the  Prague  clergy  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  pro- 
nouncements of  the  papal  see  and  to  question  whether  they 
were  just  or  not.    On  all  subjects,  doctrinal  and  disciplinary, 

^  Regniim  Bokemice  infamia  denigration.  Doc,  495.  Huss  called  it  /«- 
famia  sinistra  et  mendosa  regni  Bohemia,  p.  491. 

2  Doc.,  472-504,  gives  the  propositions  in  Latin  and  Czech,  proposed  by 
Huss  and  the  theological  faculty,  and  the  statements  of  Jacobellus,  the  bishop 
of  Leitomsyl,  etc. 


144  JOHN  HUSS 

such  as  the  seven  sacraments,  the  worship  of  relics  and  regard 
for  indulgences,  Bohemia's  glory  had  consisted  in  its  strict 
orthodoxy.  Bohemia  had  always  felt  and  taught  as  the 
Roman  Church  taught  and  not  otherwise.  This  reputation 
must  be  sustained  and,  if  necessary,  by  recourse  to  the  se- 
verest measures.  The  memorial  affirmed  that  the  pope  is 
the  head  and  the  college  of  cardinals  the  living  body  of  the 
Roman  Church — corpus  romancB  ecdesice.  They  are  the  suc- 
cessors of  Peter  and  the  other  Apostles.  It  is  theirs  to  define 
the  theology  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  all  the  world  and  to 
purge  it  of  all  errors.  The  causes  of  the  trouble  in  Prague, 
it  asserts,  were  three.  The  first  cause  was  the  refusal  to 
accept  the  condemnation  of  the  XLV  Wyclifite  Articles, 
including  Wyclif's  views  of  the  seven  sacraments.  No  one 
of  these  articles  was  Catholic. 

The  second  cause  was  the  dispute  in  regard  to  the  source 
of  authority.  Some  made  the  Scriptures  the  only  rule  in 
matters  of  faith  and  judicial  decision.  This  view  set  aside 
the  ordinance  of  God,  who  had  chosen  to  appoint  the  apostolic 
see  as  the  tribunal  of  judgment.  The  true  view  Innocent 
III  had  laid  down  in  his  bull,  per  venerabilem,  by  his  inter- 
pretation of  Deut.  17  :  8-12.^  To  confirm  this  interpretation 
as  the  memorial  quotes.  Innocent  adduced  the  Lord's  fictitious 
conversation  with  Peter  outside  the  walls  of  Rome,  when 
Peter  was  fleeing  from  the  holy  city.  The  Apostle,  meeting 
the  Lord,  said  to  him:  "Lord,  whither  art  thou  going?"  He 
replied,  "I  go  again  to  Rome  to  be  crucified."  Understanding 
what  the  Lord's  meaning  was,  the  Apostle  returned  again 
to  the  city. 

The  third  cause  of  the  trouble  was  the  denial  to  the  de- 
cisions of  the  holy  see  finality  in  cases  where  what  is 
purely   good  is  not   forbidden   and  the  purely  evil  not  com- 

*Mirbt.  138-140.  Innocent  also  quotes  I  Cor.  6:3.  "Know  ye  not 
that  ye  shall  judge  angels?  How  much  more  the  things  that  pertain  to  this 
life?  " 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       145 

manded,  as  well  as  in  other  cases.  Here  the  memorial  quotes 
Matt.  23  13,  'All  things  that  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  bid 
you,  these  do  and  observe.'  These  two  passages  from  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testaments,  Huss  took  up  in  his  reply  to  the 
memorial  and  gave  to  them  prolonged  discussion  in  his 
Treatise  on  the  Church. 

The  measures  which  the  theological  faculty  proposed 
for  the  settlement  of  the  controversy  were  as  follows:  (i) 
That  all  the  doctors  and  masters  of  the  university  take  an 
oath  in  the  presence  of  the  archbishop  and  the  other  prel- 
ates denying  that  they  held  any  of  the  XLV  Articles.  (2) 
That  they  accepted  the  seven  sacraments  and  the  veneration 
of  indulgences  and  relics  in  no  other  sense  than  the  Roman 
Church  taught,  whose  head  was  the  pope  and  whose  body 
was  the  cardinals.  (3)  That  submission  be  made  to  the 
decisions  of  the  apostolic  see  and  prelates  in  all  matters 
whatsoever.  (4)  That  Wyclif's  teachings  concerning  the 
seven  sacraments  be  declared  contrary  to  Roman  doctrine  and 
false.  All  refusing  to  take  the  oath,  professors,  clergy,  or  lay- 
men, were  to  be  punished  with  excommunication  and  exile 
from  the  realm.  They  were  to  be  treated  as  heretics,  "a  name 
to  be  abhorred  above  all  other  evil  names."  The  odious  and 
scandalous  songs,  recently  forbidden,  should  be  suppressed, 
by  royal  command,  on  the  streets  and  in  taverns.  As  for 
Huss,  he  should  be  estopped  from  preaching  or  in  any  way 
impeding  the  public  services  of  religion  by  his  presence  in 
Prague  so  long  as  he  was  under  the  condemnation  of  the 
curia.  Absolution  the  faculty  was  willing  to  intercede  with 
the  curia  to  grant,  provided  Huss  and  his  followers  subscribed 
to  the  four  conditions  named  above. 

In  his  counter-memorial  Huss  took  the  position  that  the 
existence  of  heretics  in  Bohemia  was  an  assumption  un- 
proved and  that  his  own  excommunication,  being  founded 
upon  false  information  given  to  the  apostolic  see,  was  null. 
Stanislaus  and  Palecz  themselves  had  at  one  time  held  and 


146  JOHN  HUSS 

defended  many  of  those  very  Wyclifite  articles  which  were 
now  reprobated.  How,  then,  could  they  honestly  pronounce 
every  one  of  them  uncatholic?  He  appealed  to  the  solemn 
agreement  of  July  6,  141 1,  entered  into  by  Zbynek  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  masters  of  the  university  and  himself  on 
the  other,  an  agreement  attested  by  solemn  seals.  He  called 
for  the  observance  of  the  customs  and  immunities  of  the 
kingdom  of  Bohemia  and  demanded  the  right  to  appear  in 
a  native  synod  and  answer  charges  that  might  be  brought 
against  him.  He  also  demanded  that  if  the  charges  were  not 
proved,  the  author  should  be  punished  according  to  the 
lex  talionis.  The  king  should  issue  a  decree  calling  for  public 
charges.  In  case  no  accusers  presented  themselves,  then  the 
Roman  curia  should  be  informed  by  the  hostile  party  that 
Prague  was  not  infected  with  heresy  and  that  the  kingdom 
had  been  defamed  when  charged  with  being  heretical.  The 
interdict  should  be  lifted  and  also  the  papal  decree  against  the 
free  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God. 

In  demanding  that  regard  be  paid  to  the  customs  and 
immunities  of  Bohemia,  Huss  no  doubt  had  in  mind,  as 
Loserth  says,  the  practice  followed  in  England.  The  ancient 
rites  and  customs  of  England  were  repeatedly  invoked  by 
the  successors  of  William  the  Conqueror  in  their  struggles 
against  the  encroachment  of  the  papal  see.  When  William 
was  called  upon  by  Gregory  VII  to  do  him  homage,  he  replied : 
"Fealty  I  have  never  willed  nor  will  I  now.  I  have  never 
promised  it  nor  do  I  find  that  my  predecessors  did."  He 
forbade  papal  letters  to  be  received  or  published  in  the  realm 
without  his  consent  and  no  ecclesiastic  was  to  leave  the  king- 
dom without  the  king's  permission.^  Of  these  rights  Wyclif 
was  an  intrepid  defender  and  he  advocated  the  renunciation 
of  John's  contract  to  pay  annual  tribute  of  one  thousand 
marks  to  Rome. 

Fair  as  Huss's  demand  for  an  open  trial  may  in  this  age 

^  Gee  and  Hardy.    Doc,  57. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       147 

seem  to  be,  the  matter  was  quite  a  different  thing  in  the 
fifteenth  century.  The  pope's  right  to  fulminate  censures  had 
been  treated  as  absolute.  The  method  of  the  inquisition  was 
to  regard  a  heretical  suspect  guilty,  laying  upon  him  the  bur- 
den of  proving  himself  innocent.  With  us  the  relation  is  re- 
versed; a  man  is  treated  as  innocent  until  he  is  proved  guilty. 
From  the  papal  decisions  there  was  no  appeal.  Absolute 
submission  was  the  condition  of  rehgious  existence  and  of 
life  itself.  To  refuse  it  meant  separation  from  eternal  life 
as  well  as  physical  death. 

In  defending  Huss,  Jacobellus  took  the  advanced  ground 
that  a  process  should  follow  the  rules  of  Christ's  law,  a  course 
which  would  have  carried  the  court  back  of  the  letter  of 
the  canon  law.  He  demanded  procedure  against  the  clergy 
for  simony,  adultery,  fornication  and  concubinage,  and  their 
renunciation  of  worldly  goods  and  dominions.  By  their 
preaching,  John  Huss  and  his  followers  were  laboring  to 
secure  obedience  to  Christ's  law.  The  ill  fame  of  heresy, 
said  to  attach  to  Bohemia,  did  not  hurt  the  kingdom  any 
more  than  ill  fame  could  hurt  the  true  child  of  God.  Bohemia 
cannot  be  hurt,  if  it  has  the  peace  and  concord  of  the  saints. 

A  memorial  drawn  up  by  other  masters  of  the  university 
denied  the  main  statements  urged  by  Palecz  and  Stanislaus. 
It  opened  by  clearly  repudiating  the  definition  whereby  the 
pope  is  the  head  of  the  church  and  the  cardinals  its  body. 
On  the  contrary,  Christ  is  the  head  and  all  true  Christians 
make  up  the  body.  Nor  are  the  pope  and  the  cardinals  the 
only  successors  of  Peter  and  the  Apostles.  All  bishops  and 
priests  are  their  successors.  The  "evangelical  clergy"  was 
right  in  pronouncing  the  condemnation  of  the  XLV  Ar- 
ticles unjust  and  pernicious.  Obedience  in  all  things  is  not  1 
due  to  the  pope.  Pontiffs  have  been  heretics,  have  often 
recalled  their  bulls,  err,  and  are  often  mistaken.  Yea,  a  pope 
may  be  among  the  reprobate.  The  papal  decisions  against 
Huss  were  no  more  to  be  obeyed  by  the  Prague  clergy  on 


148  JOHN  HUSS 

the  bare  ground  that  they  were  issued  and  promulgated 
than  the  devil  himself  is  to  be  obeyed  because  our  parents, 
Adam  and  Eve,  hearkened  to  him.  The  kind  of  reasoning 
applied  in  Huss's  case  would  apply  also  to  the  action  of 
Pilate,  who  condemned  Christ  because  the  priests  and  people 
at  Jerusalem  condemned  him. 

The  exact  issue  of  the  synod  is  not  known.  However, 
on  receiving  the  memorials,  the  bishop  of  Leitomysl,  who 
was  not  in  attendance,  in  a  document  dated  February  lo, 
1413,  recommended  that  a  vice-chancellor  be  appointed 
for  the  university  to  have  close  watch  for  heretics  and  er- 
roneous teaching,  and  that  Huss  should  not  only  be  strictly 
kept  from  preaching  but  also  from  issuing  writings  in  the 
language  of  the  people.  He  should  be  forced  out  of  Bethlehem 
chapel  as  the  ravening  wolf  should  be  forced  out  of  the  fold, 
lest  he  destroy  the  flock.  God  is  the  Lord  of  peace  and  not 
of  dissension.  What  are  prelates  of  the  church  for,  if  not  to 
keep  the  sheep  from  attacks  from  wolves  and  foxes !  Zbynek's 
agreement,  to  which  Huss  appealed,  had  no  validity.  It 
had  not  been  approved  by  the  apostolic  see.  Huss's  demand 
to  be  tried  in  Bohemia  and  not  in  Rome  was  against  the 
example  set  by  Paul,  who  appealed  to  Rome  and  purposed 
to  die  there  rather  than  prosecute  his  case  an)rwhere  else. 
In  his  demand  that  the  interdict  be  annulled  and  he  be 
allowed  to  preach  freely,  Huss  was  concealing  under  his 
words  the  laughter  of  foxes  and  the  howling  of  wolves,  who 
pretend  that  their  voices  are  evangelical  and  do  lie.  Huss 
was  lying  when  he  pretended  that  his  voice  of  dissension 
and  schism  was  the  voice  of  the  Gospel  and  of  charity. 

The  author  of  these  severe  sentiments,  John  Bucka, 
bishop  of  Leitomysl,  was  known  as  the  Iron  Bishop.  Huss 
had  no  more  inveterate  enemy  than  this  prelate.  At  the 
synod  of  Constance  he  was  persistent  in  his  demand  for  the 
apphcation  of  severe  measures,  and,  after  Huss's  death,  he 
was  commissioned  by  the  council  to  put  down  the  Hussite 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       149 

revolt  in  Bohemia.  He  belonged  to  that  group  of  hard  ec- 
clesiastical disciplinarians  who  insist  upon  the  rigorous  en- 
forcement of  the  letter  of  ecclesiastical  rules  and  allow  no 
room  for  individual  dissent  to  tradition  and  custom. 

The  state  of  Huss's  mind  for  this  period  of  his  absence 
from  Prague  is  revealed  in  seventeen  letters  which  are  pre- 
served from  his  pen.^  Here  we  are  admitted  to  the  inner 
realm  of  his  feelings  in  regard  to  his  leaving  his  work  in  the 
city  and  also  in  regard  to  the  possible  violent  death  which 
persistency  in  his  views  might  bring  upon  him.  His  con- 
science, as  has  been  said,  was  much  exercised  as  to  whether 
he  had  done  right  or  wrong  in  leaving  Prague.  He  was  in  a 
quandary  as  to  which  of  the  two  classes  of  passages  he  ought 
to  have  followed,  the  one  urging  flight  in  time  of  danger, 
the  other  readiness  to  suffer  death  in  the  face  of  it.  As  be- 
tween these  two,  he  did  not  know  which  to  choose.  He  had 
meditated  upon  the  words:  "A  good  shepherd  giveth  his 
life  for  the  sheep,  but  an  hireling  and  he  who  is  not  the  shep- 
herd, whose  the  sheep  are  not,  seeth  the  wolf  coming  and 
leaveth  the  sheep  and  fleeth  and  the  wolf  ravens  them  and 
destroys  the  sheep."  On  the  other  hand,  he  had  meditated 
upon  the  words:  "When  they  persecute  you  in  one  city  flee  to 
another."  He  quoted  Augustine  for  the  principle  that  if  a 
person  was  sought  out  in  his  individual  capacity — singulari- 
ter — he  was  justified  in  fleeing,  as  did  Athanasius.  Huss  might 
also  have  recalled  the  case  of  Cyprian,  who  fled  on  one  oc- 
casion from  persecution  and  later  surrendered  his  life. 

In  being  absent  from  Prague,  Huss  wrote,  he  might  be 
guilty  of  withholding  the  Word  of  God  from  his  people. 
If,  indeed,  it  should  be  found  that  he  had  fled  from  the  truth, 
then  he  prayed  that  the  Lord  would  give  him  an  opportunity 
to  die  in  the  profession  of  the  same  truth.  The  interdict, 
he  wrote,  had  led  to  great  unrest  and  commotion  among  the 
people,  as  baptism  and  burial  of  the  dead  were  forbidden, 

*  Doc,  34-66.    Workman  and  Pope's  Engl,  transl.,  83-138. 


I50  JOHN  HUSS 

and,  on  that  account,  great  disorder  was  to  be  feared,  should 
he  return.  ''Whether  I  did  right  or  wrong  in  withdrawing, 
I  hardly  know."  Huss  visited  Prague  a  number  of  times, 
first  at  Christmas  time,  141 2. 

As  for  the  trials  through  which  he  was  passing,  he  wrote 
to  his  friends  of  Bethlehem  chapel  that  the  devil  had  been 
going  about  roaring  against  him  for  several  years,  but  had 
not  hurt  a  hair  of  his  head.  On  the  contrary,  his  joy  and 
gladness  had  increased.  Again  and  again  he  quoted  pas- 
sages describing  the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  Christ's  ex- 
hortations to  his  disciples  to  expect  tribulation  and  to  bear 
up  under  it,  trusting  in  him.  If  Christ  suffered  at  the  hands 
of  priests  and  Pharisees,  who  said,  "This  man  is  not  of  God," 
why  should  we  be  surprised  if  the  ministers  of  antichrist 
speak  evil  of  his  servants  to-day,  excommunicate  them,  and 
put  them  to  death,  for  they  are  even  more  greedy  and  cruel 
than  the  Pharisees.  Christ  said:  "I  send  you  as  sheep  among 
wolves.  Be  ye,  therefore,  wise  as  serpents  and  harmless  as 
doves.  And  beware  of  men,  lest  they  deliver  you  up  to  coun- 
cils." He  heard  that  they  were  going  about  to  destroy  Beth- 
lehem chapel  and  to  put  an  end  to  preaching  in  other  churches, 
but  he  beUeved  God.  They  would  accomplish  nothing. 
The  Goose,  a  tame  and  domestic  bird,  would  break  through 
the  nets  spread  for  it,  while  other  birds  exceeding  it  in  power 
of  flight  would  be  caught  in  the  snares.  Seeing  the  true  God 
is  with  us,  who  is  able  to  separate  us  from  Him?  The  chief 
priests,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  Herod  and  Pilate  and  others 
of  Jerusalem  condemned  truth  and  sentenced  Christ  to 
death.  Yea,  they  branded  him  with  heresy  and  excom- 
municated him,  and  outside  the  walls  of  the  city  crucified 
him  as  a  malefactor.  But  he  rose  again,  came  forth  as 
conqueror,  and,  in  his  place,  he  sent  forth  twelve  other  preach- 
ers. If  the  true  God,  our  most  mighty  and  righteous  Pro- 
tector, be  with  us,  who  can  prevail  against  us  in  spite  of  their 
wicked  designs? 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       151 

His  friends  in  Prague  he  exhorted  to  remember  that 
Christ  came  to  separate  man  and  man  and  it  was  predicted 
that  many  false  prophets  should  arise  and  seduce  men.  But 
they  should  also  remember  the  promise  that  not  a  hair  of 
their  heads  shall  perish  and  remain  true  to  the  Word  of  Christ. 
''What,  after  all,  do  we  lose  if  for  his  cause  we  suffer  loss 
of  goods,  friends,  the  honors  of  this  world,  and  our  wretched 
life  itself?  Certainly,  at  last,  we  shall  be  delivered  from  the 
misery  of  this  present  world  and,  having  received  a  hundred- 
fold more  goods  and  friends  and  more  perfect  joy,  death 
shall  not  deprive  us  of  these  things.  For  whoso  dies  for 
Christ,  he  conquers.  He  is  delivered  from  all  misery  and 
attains  that  eternal  joy  unto  which  the  Saviour  deigns  to 
bring  us  all."  He  begged  his  correspondents  to  offer  up  their 
prayers  for  those  who  were  preaching  the  Word  of  God  with 
grace,  and  for  himself  that  he  might  be  permitted  yet  more 
abundantly  to  preach  and  write  against  the  malice  of  anti- 
christ. No  excommunication  but  God's  excommunication 
can  do  injury.  May  the  most  excellent  Bishop  give  to  us  all 
the  benediction,  saying:  "Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father, 
receive  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world."  Although  he  was  not  yet  shut  up  in  prison, 
yet  was  he  prepared,  if  called  upon,  so  he  wrote,  to  die  for 
Christ's  sake. 

Five  of  the  letters  written  during  the  exile  period  were 
addressed  to  his  friend  Christian  of  Prachaticz,  rector  of  the 
university,  and  abound  in  the  consolations  offered  in  the 
Scriptures  to  those  who  are  oppressed  for  righteousness' 
sake.  "I  want,"  Huss  wrote,  "to  live  godly,  and  it  behooves 
me  to  suffer  in  the  name  of  Christ  and  thus  to  imitate  Christ 
in  his  trials."  He  exhorts  Prachaticz  and  his  colleagues  to  be 
prepared  for  the  great  conflict  which  he  expected  to  follow 
the  preliminary  skirmishes  which  were  going  on  with  anti- 
christ. With  reference  to  the  action  of  the  theological  faculty, 
he  wrote:  "So  Christ  our  Lord  help  me,  I  would  not  heed  its 


1 


152  JOHN  HUSS 

proposition,  even  if  I  knew  the  fire  was  prepared  for  me  and 
I  was  standing  close  to  it.  I  hope  that  death  may  take  to 
heaven  or  to  hell  either  myself  or  the  two  who  have  turned 
from  the  truth  before  I  give  consent  to  their  judgment." 

The  two  referred  to  were  Stanislaus  and  Palecz,  as  he  goes 
on  to  say,  men  who  called  Huss  and  his  followers  Wyclifists 
and  infidels  and  wanderers  from  the  sound  faith  of  Christ. 
They  had  once  followed  the  truth  according  to  Christ's  law, 
but,  struck  through  with  fear  of  punishment,  had  turned  and 
were  flattering  the  pope.  He  hoped  that,  with  God's  grace, 
if  it  should  become  necessary,  he  would  be  wilHng  to  stand 
up  against  them  even  to  consuming  fire.  "It  is  better  to  die 
well  than  to  live  ill.  One  should  not  flinch  before  the  sentence 
of  death.  To  finish  the  present  life  in  grace  is  to  go  away 
from  pain  and  misery.  He  who  fears  death  loses  the  joy  of 
life.  Above  all  else  truth  triumphs.  He  conquers  who  dies 
because  no  adversity  can  hurt  the  one  over  whom  iniquity 
holds  not  sway."  Here  we  think  both  of  Wyclif  and  Melanch- 
thon — Wyclif,  who  in  a  solemn  moment,  after  the  council  of 
London,  1381,  had  declared,  ''I  believe  that  in  the  end  the 
truth  will  conquer,"  and  Melanchthon,  who,  before  dying,  put 
in  parallel  columns  the  benefits  of  living  and  of  dying,  giving 
the  advantage  to  dying. 

At  another  time  he  wrote  to  the  rector  that  he  could  not 
accept  the  statement  that  the  pope  is  the  head  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Church  and  the  cardinals  the  body,  for  thus  he  would 
be  forced  to  accept  all  the  deliverances  of  the  Holy  Roman 
Church.  In  such  a  statement  "truly  the  snake  lurks  in  the 
grass;  for,  if  it  were  true,  then  the  pope  and  cardinals  would 
constitute  the  whole  Roman  Church,  even  as  the  body  and 
the  head  together  make  up  the  whole  man.  If  the  statement 
were  true,  then  all  the  decrees  of  popes  and  curia  must  be 
obeyed  and,  if  Huss  does  not  accept  them  all,  then  he  is 
an  incorrigible  heretic  fit  only  for  the  fire.  Boniface  had 
solemnly  declared  that  Wenzel  was  not  to  be  accepted  as 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM   PRAGUE       153 

king  of  the  Romans  or  Sigismund  king  of  the  Hungarians: 
therefore  neither  of  them  is  now  king.  Liberius  was  a  heretic 
as  well  as  were  other  popes.  In  the  memorial  of  the  theo- 
logical faculty  Palecz  and  Stanislaus  did  not  even  make 
mention  of  Christ.  If  the  pope  lives  according  to  the  rule  of 
Christ,  then  is  he  the  head  of  as  much  of  the  Catholic  Church 
as  he  rules  over.  If  he  lives  contrary  to  Christ,  then  is  he  a 
thief  and  a  robber,  a  ravening  wolf,  the  chief  antichrist." 

From  Huss  in  exile,  we  turn  our  attention  to  scenes  being 
enacted  at  Rome.  There  the  authorities  were  proceeding 
against  Wyclif's  memory  and  books.  By  a  decree  of  John 
XXIII,  February  10,  1413,  and  the  council  sitting  in  the  holy 
city,  which  John  called  a  "general  council,"  Wychf's  books 
were  branded  as  containing  many  heretical  doctrines  and 
many  errors.  The  mad  poison  of  their  teachings — rabidum 
venenum — were  pronounced  Hke  the  pestiferous  leaven  of  the 
Pharisees,  corrupting  the  true  Catholic  erudition,  like  the 
abomination  of  desolation  in  the  holy  place,  like  leprosy  in 
the  human  body  which  threatened  to  turn  true  Christians 
into  scorpions  and  serpents.  In  accordance  with  the  words, 
that  every  branch  that  abideth  not  in  Christ  should  be  cut  off 
and  burned,  Wyclif's  writings  were  condemned  to  be  publicly 
committed  to  the  flames  wherever  they  were  found.  An 
example  was  set  in  Rome  itself,  where  all  copies  upon  which 
hands  could  be  laid  were  burned  in  front  of  the  doors  of  St. 
Peter's. 

Shortly  after  Easter,  1413,  in  order  to  restore  tranquillity 
to  his  realm,  the  king  appointed  a  commission  consisting  of 
Albik,  Prachaticz,  and  two  others,  with  instructions  to  arbi- 
trate between  the  two  parties  and  to  secure  their  agreement 
to  some  formula  of  peace.  Representatives  of  both  parties 
were  summoned,  including  Stanislaus  of  Znaim,  Stephen 
Palecz,  John  of  Jesenicz,  and  Simon  of  Tissnow.  They  met 
the  commission  in  the  parish  house  of  St.  Michael's,  the 
residence  of  Prachaticz.    They  mutually  agreed  to  abide  by 


154  JOHN  HUSS 

the  decision  of  the  commission  and,  upon  default,  to  pay 
sixty  thousands  groschen  and  be  exiled  from  the  realm. 

In  regard  to  the  sacraments  and  some  other  matters, 
the  representatives  agreed  to  accept  the  definition  of  the 
Roman  Church.  On  the  definition  of  the  church  they  divided, 
Palecz  and  his  party  insisting  upon  defining  the  church  as 
the  pope  and  the  cardinals  then  living.  The  Hussites  defined 
it  as  the  body  of  which  Christ  is  the  head,  the  pope  being 
the  vicegerent.  About  this  and  other  questions  the  com- 
mission decided  to  proceed  on  the  assumption  that  the  two 
parties  were  in  substantial  accord,  and  it  proposed  on  the 
next  day  to  bring  forward  matters  of  personal  dispute  between 
them,  and  at  the  same  time  a  decision  upon  those  matters. 
When  the  day  came,  Palecz  and  his  friends  offered  uncon- 
ditional objection  to  the  several  clauses  incorporating  the 
commission's  decision.  One  clause  was  that  the  Roman 
Church  should  be  submitted  to  "as  far  as  a  good  and  faithful 
Christian  ought  to  submit."  A  second  clause  stipulated  that 
Palecz  and  his  party  should  write  to  the  curia  that  they 
knew  of  no  heresy  in  Bohemia  and  that  no  heretic  had  been 
found.  Their  refusal  to  comply  with  this  second  clause  was 
in  part  on  the  ground  that  such  a  recommendation  would 
give  the  lie  to  their  former  statements  and  in  part  on  the 
ground  that  a  proper  search  for  heretics  had  not  been  made.^ 

Hereupon  the  anti-Hussites,  Peter  of  Znaim  and  Stanis- 
laus of  Znaim,  John  Elias,  and  Palecz,  were  found  contuma- 
cious and  were  consigned  by  royal  edict  to  perpetual  banish- 
ment. Their  canonries  as  well  as  their  offices  at  the  university 
were  transferred  to  their  four  opponents.  The  University 
Chronicle  states  that  the  banished  theologians  "did  not  visit 
Prague  again  until  after  the  king's  death,  for  that  they  had 
precipitated  themselves  into  the  penalty  of  exile."     Stanis- 

^  A  vivid  account  of  the  conference  and  the  differences  between  the  two 
parties,  written  by  Palecz  himself,  is  given  in  Doc,  507-510.  There  is  no  pos- 
sible doubt  of  Palecz  definition  of  the  church.  He  said  with  precision,  per 
Romanam  ecdesiam  intelligimus  papam  cum  cardinalibus. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM   PRAGUE       155 

laus,  however,  never  returned,  but  died  as  he  was  about  to 
set  out  for  the  council  of  Constance.  The  banishment  of 
these  four  leaders  by  a  decree,  which  was  pronounced  ir- 
revocable, was  a  severe  blow  to  the  anti-Hussite  party. 
Another  blow  was  the  reduction  of  the  German  element  in 
the  city  council  of  the  old  town.  For  a  century  or  more 
this  element  had  had  the  preponderance.  By  an  order  at 
this  time,  issued  by  the  king,  the  representation  was  equally 
divided  between  the  Bohemians  and  Germans,  nine  from 
each  nationaUty. 

If  these  events  seem  to  indicate  a  strong  determination 
on  the  part  of  the  city  and  court  to  stand  by  Huss,  the  feeling 
in  the  country  was  even  more  pronounced  in  his  favor.  To 
this  feehng  his  words  referred  which  he  uttered  at  Constance: 
"Truly  I  have  said  it:  of  my  own  free  will  I  came  here,  and 
so  numerous  and  so  powerful  are  the  Bohemian  nobles  who 
love  me  that  I  should  have  been  right  able  to  find  refuge 
and  safety  within  the  walls  of  their  castles,  and  that,  if  I 
had  not  willed  to  come  hither,  neither  that  king — Wenzel — 
nor  this  king — Sigismund — would  have  been  able  to  come 
and  take  me  away  by  force." 

Huss  continued  at  Kozi  hradek  until  April,  1414,  when, 
by  the  death  of  the  lord,  the  guardianship  of  the  castle  passed 
into  hands  not  favorable  to  him.  Huss  then  found  housing  in 
the  castle  of  Krakowec,  belonging  to  Henry  Lefl  of  Lazan, 
a  high  favorite  at  the  court.  By  his  own  testimony  he  preached 
in  the  open  fields,  woods,  highways,  and  pubhc  squares,  going 
from  village  to  village  and  from  castle  to  castle,  everywhere 
followed  by  large  concourses  of  people.  He  especially  men- 
tions a  linden-tree  near  the  castle  of  Kozi  hradek  under  which 
he  was  accustomed  to  preach.  In  one  of  his  sermons  he  said: 
"Jesus  went  about  on  foot  preaching,  and  not  drawn  in  a 
splendid  carriage  as  are  the  priests  to-day.  But  I,  alas,  also 
am  drawn  about  in  a  carriage,  and  I  accuse  myself  of  this 
indulgence  of  not  going  about  on  foot  to  preach  even  as  my 


156  JOHN  HUSS 

Redeemer  was  accustomed  to  do,  and  I  do  not  know  whether 
in  the  future  it  will  be  a  fitting  excuse  that  I  am  not  able 
quickly  to  reach  distant  localities  on  foot." 

During  this  period  he  found  time  to  write  much,  including 
his  chief  work,  the  Treatise  on  the  Church,  and  the  tracts  in 
answer  to  Stanislaus  and  Palecz,  A  tract  entitled  Six  Errors 
to  he  Avoided^  contains  in  preliminary  headings  the  words 
which  were  inscribed  on  the  walls  of  the  Bethlehem  chapel, 
June  21,  1413.  These  headings  are:  (i)  On  Creation.  It 
is  not  true  that  the  priest,  as  the  people  are  seduced  to 
believe,  creates  at  the  mass  the  body  of  Christ,  so  that  it 
is  evident  that  he  is  the  creator  of  his  Creator.  (2)  On 
Faith.  Faith  can  be  truly  exercised  in  God  only  and  not  in 
the  blessed  Virgin,  the  pope,  or  the  saints.  (3)  On  Remis- 
sion. Priests  cannot  remit  sins  and  absolve  from  punishment 
and  guilt — a  poena  et  culpa.  (4)  On  Obedience.  Inferiors 
are  not  bound  in  all  things  to  submit  to  superiors.  (5)  Ex- 
communication. If  unjust,  it  does  not  separate  from  the 
communion  of  the  faithful  or  deprive  of  the  sacraments  of 
the  church.  (6)  Simony.  Alas,  it  taints  the  larger  part  of 
the  clergy  and  is  to  be  crushed  out. 

In  his  elaboration  of  these  principles,  Huss  lays  down 
the  propositions  that  neither  good  nor  bad  angels,  much  less 
men,  can  create  anything  at  all,  and  that  we  ought  to  obey 
God  rather  than  men.  All  the  principles  of  this  tract  are 
set  forth  in  greater  fulness  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church. 

In  the  decision  on  matters  concerning  the  church  and  its 
relation  to  the  nations  and  society,  the  university  of  Paris 
was,  next  to  Rome,  the  most  important  earthly  tribunal,  and 
to  the  attention  of  the  Parisian  theological  faculty  the  Bo- 
hemian matter  was  officially  carried  by  the  cardinals  of  Pisa 
and  Rheims  and  by  other  prelates  and  doctors.  The  allega- 
tion was  that  the  writings  of  a  certain  John  Huss  should  be 
examined  and  judgment  pronounced  upon  them.  Copies 
^  De  sex  erroribus,  Mon.,  i  :  237-243. 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM  PRAGUE       157 

of  these  writings  had  been  brought  to  Paris  by  Peter  of  Prague. 
Gerson,  the  rector  of  the  university  and  dean  of  its  faculty 
of  sacred  theology,  wrote  two  letters  to  Konrad,  archbishop 
of  Prague,  under  date  of  September,  1414,  in  regard  to  Huss.^ 

John  Gerson,  1363-1429,  among  the  illustrious  men  in  the 
history  of  France,  was  one  of  the  most  influential  leaders  of 
the  first  half  of  the  fourteenth  century.  He  labored  with 
great  zeal  to  bring  the  papal  schism  to  an  end,  and  the  prin- 
ciple for  which  he  contended  he  saw  recognized — that  a 
general  council  is  superior  to  the  pope  and  may  depose  popes. 
He  opposed  some,  of  the  superstitions  of  his  day  inherited 
from  other  times  and  emphasized  the  authority  of  the  sacred 
text,  but  he  stopped  short  of  the  principles  of  the  Reformation 
and  saw  in  the  organization  of  the  church  a  remedy  for  all  its 
ills.  He  was  a  prominent  actor  at  the  council  of  Constance 
and  voted  against  Huss.  In  the  first  of  his  letters  he  called 
Konrad's  attention  to  the  pernicious  tares  sown  by  Wyclif, 
which  for  many  years  had  been  infecting  the  field  of  the 
church.  Heresies  should  be  exterminated  with  the  scythe  or 
hoe  of  miracles  and  councils  and,  in  desperate  cases,  they  and 
their  authors  were  to  be  cut  down  with  the  axe  wielded  by  the 
secular  arm  and  committed  to  the  flames — excidens  hczreses 
cum  auctoribus  suis  et  in  ignem  mittens.  Other  measures  prov- 
ing of  no  avail,  the  rector  exhorts  the  archbishop  to  resort  to 
the  secular  arm,  that  the  axe  might  be  laid  at  the  root  of  the 
unfruitful  and  corrupt  tree;  surely  it  should  be  invoked  for 
the  salvation  of  the  sheep,  lest  the  pastures,  corrupted  with  the 
deadly  seed  of  poisonous  doctrine,  breathe  out  death  instead 
of  Hfe. 

The  second  communication  Gerson  accompanied  with 
a  list  of  twenty  errors  extracted  from  Huss's  works.  The 
one  which  he  pronounced  the  most  radically  pernicious  was 
that  a  reprobate  or  one  living  in  mortal  sin — pope,  lord,  or 
prelate — had  no  right  to  exercise  authority  over  Christian 
» Doc,  185-188,  523-529. 


158  JOHN  HUSS 

people,  an  error,  he  affirmed,  which  had  often  been  condemned, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  Waldenses  and  Beghards.  In  his  humble 
opinion — parvitati  mem — it  seemed  that  such  a  tenet  should 
be  destroyed  by  fire  and  the  sword  rather  than  the  attempt 
made  to  overcome  it  by  a  process  of  subtle  ratiocination. 
Power  to  govern  on  earth  was  not  derived  from  the  title  of 
predestination,  which  is  manifestly  uncertain,  but  from 
ecclesiastical  and  civil  laws.  Among  the  other  tenets  con- 
demned by  Gerson  were:  that  those  popes  only  are  of  the 
church  who  imitate  in  their  lives  Christ  and  the  Apostles, 
an  error,  he  affirmed,  in  faith  and  morals  full  to  the  brim  of 
arrogance  and  temerity;  that  the  pope  should  not  be  called 
most  holy,  nor  are  his  feet  blessed  and  to  be  kissed;  that 
Christ  alone,  and  not  the  pope,  is  the  head  of  the  church; 
that  tithes  and  gifts  to  the  church  and  to  ecclesiastics  are 
pure  alms;  that  an  excommunicate  person  is  to  be  spared 
if  he  appeals  to  Christ;  that  ecclesiastics  evil  in  their  lives 
may  and  ought  to  be  coerced  by  laymen  by  the  withdrawal 
of  tithes  and  other  temporalities;  and  that  all  acts  done 
without  love  are  sinful. 

Some  of  these  errors  had  been  held  by  the  Donatists 
in  the  fifth  century  and  more  recently,  so  Gerson  declares, 
by  Marsighus  of  Padua  and  John  of  Jandun  and  had  been 
condemned.  In  regard  to  Huss's  insistence  upon  the  right 
to  preach,  Gerson  insists  that  there  is  a  zeal  against  the  vices 
of  the  clergy  which  is  without  knowledge.  Vices  and  errors 
cannot  be  uprooted  by  vices.  In  Beelzebub's  kingdom 
demons  were  not  cast  out  by  demons.  Not  to  set  oneself 
against  such  errors  as  those  cherished  by  Huss  is  to  approve 
them.  Princes  and  prelates  are  under  obligation  to  proceed 
with  diligence  against  such  errors  and  to  punish  their  as- 
serters  with  the  severest  penalties  of  the  law. 

John  XXIII  also  wrote  to  Konrad,  calling  upon  him 
to  do  his  duty.  Simon,  cardinal  of  Rheims,  reminded  the 
archbishop  of  the  case  of  Arius  and,  resorting  to  the  well- 


HUSS'S  WITHDRAWAL  FROM   PRAGUE       159 

tried  terminology,  urged  him  to  act  with  boldness  in  hunting 
up  the  foxes  that  destroy  the  vine,  in  cutting  out  the  putrid 
flesh,  and  casting  away  the  diseased  sheep  that  it  may  no 
longer  infect  the  flock.  "Let  us,"  he  went  on,  "place  our- 
selves as  a  wall  for  the  defense  of  the  house  of  God,  that  we 
may  stand  in  the  battle  in  the  day  of  the  Lord." 

In  a  brief  reply  to  Gerson,  Konrad  expressed  readiness 
to  be  diligent  in  extirpating  the  errors  of  that  pernicious 
arch-heretic  John  Wyclif,  deceased.  But  his  language  does 
not  betoken  zeal  in  the  matter  of  Huss's  prosecution. 

Thus  Huss  had  against  him  the  pope,  the  curia,  the  uni- 
versity of  Paris,  and  the  great  theological  authority  of  Eu- 
rope, John  Gerson.  In  the  case  of  Luther,  the  universities 
of  Paris,  Cologne,  and  Louvain  burned  his  books  and  Leo  X 
and  the  curia  were  against  him,  but  no  theological  leader  of 
the  fame  of  Gerson  was  represented  among  his  enemies.  The 
fame  of  Erasmus,  who  half-heartedly  put  himself  on  the 
opposite  side,  was  of  another  sort.  Only  too  well  did  Huss 
know  what  it  meant  to  be  a  heretic.  Writing  to  Prachaticz, 
April,  1413,  he  had  said:  "They  pronounce  me  a  heretic. 
For  it  follows  that  whatever  decision  is  sent  forth  by  the 
Holy  Roman  Church,  that  is,  by  the  pope  in  conjunction 
with  the  cardinals,  that  decision  is  to  be  held  as  the  faith. 
He  with  his  household  decides  that  indulgences  emptying 
pocket  and  purse^  are  catholic,  therefore  this  decision  must 
be  held  as  of  the  faith.  But  thou,  Huss,  hast  preached  the 
opposite.     Therefore  renounce  thy  heresy  or  be  burned." 

The  end  of  the  period  of  his  retirement  was  near  its  close. 
Events  were  rapidly  converging  toward  the  council  to  be  held 
in  Constance.  Later,  behind  the  dungeon  walls  in  that  city, 
he  must  often  have  gone  back  with  pleasure  to  the  days  of 
preaching  in  the  free  country  of  Bohemia  and,  at  the  same 
time,  he  must  have  asked  himself  the  question  whether  per- 

^  A  pera  et  a  bursa,  a  play  on  the  words  a  pcena  et  culpa.    Doc,  58.     Mon., 
I  :  398. 


i6o  JOHN  HUSS 

haps  another  course  than  the  one  he  took  in  absenting  him- 
self from  Prague  might  not  have  proved  the  most  prof- 
itable to  the  cause  he  was  advocating  and  for  which  he  was 
soon  to  die. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

HUSS   BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL   OF   CONSTANCE 

Quiim  Detts  maximus  et  justissimus  judex  sit,  qui  errare  non  potest, 
causam  ei  commendavi,  non  dico  meant  scd  ejus  ipsiiis.  — Huss,  Doc, 
726. 

Since  God  is  the  supreme  and  most  just  judge  and  never  errs,  T  have      > 
committed  the  cause  to  Him;  I  do  not  say  mine  but  His  own. 

Huss's  appeal  to  be  heard  before  a  council  was  never 
realized  in  the  way  he  hoped.  Nevertheless,  his  appearance 
before  the  general  council,  which  met  at  Constance,  1414- 
1418,  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  notable  trials  in  the 
history  of  church  procedure.  The  two  questions  of  supreme 
importance,  which  this  convention  was  convoked  to  discuss, 
were  the  healing  of  the  papal  schism  and  the  reform  of  the 
church  in  head  and  members.  The  case  of  Huss  scarcely 
yielded  to  these  subjects  in  the  interest  it  excited  and  the 
time  devoted  to  its  discussion.  It  was  tantamount  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  purity  of  the  church's  doctrine.  So 
also,  just  two  centuries  before,  the  famous  fourth  Lateran 
council  of  12 15 — the  twelfth  oecumenical  council — under  the 
presidency  of  Innocent  III,  took  measures  to  maintain  the 
church's  doctrinal  purity  by  disciplinary  decrees  and  by 
measures  to  exterminate  the  heresy  which  had  arisen  in 
Southern  France. 

Of  all  ecclesiastical  assemblies  of  the  Middle  Ages  the 
synod  of  Constance  is  at  once  the  most  spectacular  and  the  y 

most  imposing.^    It  was  a  veritable  parliament  of  the  nations 
of  Western  Europe,  where  the  leading  intellects  of  the  age 

^  Funk,  K.-gesch.,  6th  ed.,  496,  pronounces  it  eine  der  grossarligsten  Kirchen-  ' 

versamndungen  welcke  die  Geschichle  kenni. 

161 


i62  JOHN  HUSS 

engaged  in  discussion,  some  of  whom  felt  the  spirit  of  free 
inquiry  which  was  then  stirring  in  Latin  Christendom.  As 
in  1046,  at  the  instance  of  Henry  III,  the  synod  of  Sutri 
deposed  three  popes,  all  resident  in  Rome,  and  elected  a 
fourth,  so  for  the  second  time  this  council  decided  between 
the  claims  of  three  pontiffs  and,  setting  all  three  aside,  chose 
a  fourth.  This  it  did  by  virtue  of  the  supreme  authority  it 
asserted  for  itself  in  the  church  on  earth.  Gregory  XII  of 
the  Roman  line  was  prevailed  upon  to  resign.  Benedict  XIII 
of  the  Avignon  line,  and  John  XXIII  of  the  Pisan  succession 
were  deposed.  Martin  V  was  then  elected  pope  and  all 
Western  Christendom  was  reunited  under  a  single  earthly 
head  with  the  exception  of  a  small  Spanish  territory,  where 
a  few  thousand  adherents  continued  to  cling  to  the  obedience 
of  Benedict  until  that  vigorous  ruler's  death,  1424. 

Effective  as  the  council's  action  was  in  doing  away  with 
the  rival  popes,  its  decision  constituting  itself  the  supreme 
tribunal  in  the  church  was  doomed  to  be  rudely  set  aside. 
The  church  had  been  reading,  or  was  about  to  read,  stirring 
tracts  issued  by  Konrad  of  Gelnhausen,  Henry  of  Langen- 
stein,  Gerson,  Dietrich  of  Nieheim,  Peter  d'Ailly,  and  Nicholas 
of  Clemanges,  in  which  were  discussed  the  questions  of  the 
supreme  earthly  seat  of  authority  and  the  undone  condition 
of  the  church,  the  result  in  part  of  the  papal  schism.  The 
decision  of  its  fifth  session,  when  it  placed  itself  above  the 
pope,  was  in  accord  with  the  theory  of  the  ancient  church 
but  conflicted  with  the  theory  for  which  Gregory  VII,  In- 
nocent III,  and  Boniface  VIII  had  stood. 

An  oecumenical  council,  so  Gerson  asserted  in  a  famous 
sermon  preached  at  Constance,  March  23,  141 5,  has  authority 
to  punish  popes  and  set  them  aside.^  A  pontiff  is  set  over 
the  church  as  Joseph  was  set  over  his  master's  wife,  not  to 
debauch  her  but  to  guard  her  interests.      A  pontiff  may  be 

*  Du  Pin's  ed.  of  Gerson's  Works,  2  :  219.    The  terms  church  and  general 
council  he  used  as  synonymous,  p.  172. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  163 

guilty  of  heresy,  and  by  that  fact  is  deposed  of  God.  In  the 
boldest  and  most  powerful  of  these  tracts,  Nieheim  declared 
that  a  pope  might  be  worse  than  the  devil — pejor  quam 
diabolus — that  he  is  not  infallible  and  that,  like  Christ,  he 
is  subject  to  the  earthly  tribunal.  The  canons  of  a  council 
are  immutable  except  as  they  may  be  set  aside  by  the  decision 
of  a  succeeding  council,  and  the  pope  has  no  authority  to 
adjourn  a  council.  But,  as  has  been  said,  the  proud  procla- 
mation of  the  great  council  of  Constance  did  not  long  hold 
good.  In  less  than  half  of  a  century  it  was  set  aside  with  a 
single  stroke  of  the  pen  by  Pius  II  in  his  bull  Execrabilis, 
1459,  which  declared  that  an  appeal  from  a  papal  decision 
deserved  excommunication.  For  to  Christ's  vicar  it  had 
been  given  to  feed  Christ's  flock  and  to  loose  and  bind  on 
earth  and  in  heaven.  All  appeals  to  a  council,  which  were 
compared  to  a  pestiferous  venom,  were  to  be  punished  with 
ecclesiastical  anathema. 

The  council  of  Pisa,  which  had  elected  Alexander  V, 
in  adjourning,  1409,  had  appointed  another  council  to  meet 
in  three  years.  It  convened  April  12,  141 2,  in  Rome, 
but  was  poorly  attended,  burned  Wyclif's  writings,  and  had 
no  further  significance.  John  XXIII  was  wholly  disinclined 
to  witness  the  assembling  of  another  council,  where  dis- 
cussion might  be  unchecked  and  doctors  of  the  church  ar- 
rogate to  themselves  authority  over  the  papacy.  Envoys 
sent  by  the  university  of  Paris  sought  to  persuade  him.  His 
hand,  however,  was  forced  by  Sigismund,  heir  to  the  empire. 
Sigismund's  imperial  claims  and  restless  energy  were  soon 
to  make  him  the  most  conspicuous  civil  personage  in  Christen- 
dom. His  interest  in  the  council  was  due  less  to  a  high  relig- 
ious purpose  to  bring  about  reforms  in  the  church  than  to 
an  ambition  to  play  a  leading  part  in  the  eyes  of  his  generation. 
He  had  some  taste  for  books  and  spoke  several  languages, 
but  was  frivolous,  unreliable,  and  sensual,  ^neas  Sylvius 
declared  him  to  be  witty  in  conversation,  given  to  wine  and 


i64  JOHN  HUSS 

women,  and  mixed  up,  according  to  popular  rumor,  in  thou- 
sands of  love  intrigues.^  He  spent  money  lavishly,  a  weak- 
ness from  which  his  brother  Wenzel  was  free. 

Although  to  Sigismund,  more  than  to  John,  the  council 
was  due,  yet  to  the  opinion  of  the  scholarly  guild  of  Europe 
it  was  due  more  than  to  both  these  dignitaries.  Pressed  by 
the  Hussite  disputes  in  Bohemia,  the  king  saw  in  the  council 
a  feasible  way  for  settHng  them,  but  also  a  means  of  dis- 
playing his  own  authority  at  the  expense  of  his  elder  brother 
Wenzel  both  as  a  champion  of  orthodoxy  and  the  protector 
of  the  rights  of  Bohemia.  His  initiative  in  seeking  the  ap- 
pointment of  the  council,  united  with  his  imperial  claims, 
called  forth  repeatedly  from  John  XXIII  the  address  "Advo- 
cate and  Defender  of  the  Church,"  a  title  Sigismund  did 
not  shrink  from  using  himself.  The  sack  of  Rome  by  Ladis- 
laus  forced  John  XXIII  into  the  king's  hands.  A  delegation 
of  two  of  John's  cardinals  met  Sigismund  at  Como,  Octo- 
ber 13,  1413.  One  of  them  was  Zabarella,  former  professor 
at  Padua,  and  known  there  as  the  king  of  canon  law,  and  now 
since  his  elevation,  in  1410,  popularly  known  as  the  cardinal 
of  Florence.  His  commentaries  on  the  Decretals  and  Clemen- 
tines were  highly  prized.  The  legates  signified  the  pope's 
readiness  to  summon  the  council.  The  place  led  to  much 
discussion.  Bologna,  Genoa,  Nice,  Rome,  and  cities  north 
of  the  Alps  were  suggested.  October  30,  Sigismund  an- 
nounced the  coming  synod. 

The  king  and  John  met  at  Lodi,  and,  after  in  vain  at- 
tempting to  efifect  a  change  in  the  place  of  meeting,  John 
assented  to  Constance  and  attached  his  seal  to  the  summons 
of  the  council.     Sigismund  is  said  to  have  rebuked  the  pon- 

'  At  festivities  given  Sigismund  at  Innsbruck  by  Duke  Frederick  of  Austria, 
ruler  of  the  Tyrol,  the  daughter  of  a  notable  citizen  was  violated  and  the 
crime  charged  now  to  one,  now  to  the  other  of  these  princes,  both  of  whom 
denied  it.  For  an  account  of  his  gallantries  in  Strassburg,  see  Wylie,  p.  24. 
Palacky,  Gesch.,  3  :  309  sqq.,  ascribes  to  the  emperor  some  of  the  chivalric 
temper  of  his  father,  Charles  IV. 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     165 

tiff's  scandalous  life,  and  the  report  went  that  for  a  payment 
of  fifty  thousand  gold  guldens  he  promised  not  to  join  in 
any  attempt  to  unseat  John.^  Thus  the  two  great  luminaries 
of  this  mundane  sphere,  as  Sigismund  wrote  to  Charles  VI 
of  France,  were  side  by  side,  pope  and  emperor,  appointed 
to  rule — the  one  over  the  spiritual,  the  other  over  the 
material,  affairs  of  the  world. 

(Ecumenical  councils  had  decided  questions  of  heresy  be- 
fore, beginning  with  the  first  council,  325,  held  at  Nice,  which 
punished  the  heresy  of  Arius.  Early  in  the  spring  of  1414, 
while  sojourning  at  Friuli,  in  Lombardy,  Sigismund  com- 
missioned Lord  Wenzel  of  Duba,  Henry  Chlum  of  Lacembok, 
and  Henry's  nephew,  John  of  Chlum  on  their  return  to 
Bohemia  to  propose  to  Huss  that  he  refer  his  case  to  the 
council  for  adjudication  without  delay.  At  the  same  time, 
if  we  follow  Peter  of  Mladenowicz's  report,  these  noblemen 
brought  assurances  from  the  king  that  he  would  send  Huss 
letters  of  safe-conduct  both  for  the  journey  to  Constance  and 
the  return  journey  to  Bohemia.  Huss's  assent,  which  seems 
to  have  been  given  with  alacrity,  marked  an  epoch  in  his  Hfe 
and  introduces  its  last  chapters — his  imprisonment  and  trial 
and  his  death  at  the  stake.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
though  at  times  he  may  have  shared  the  misgivings  of  friends 
for  his  safety,  he  looked  forward  to  the  council  with  a  cour- 
age born  of  the  conviction  that  he  was  innocent  and  that  he 
would  receive  fair  treatment. 

Before  starting  on  the  journey,  and  with  the  help  of  his 
friends,  he  made  every  effort  to  secure  clean  papers  certifying 
to  his  good  standing  in  the  church  in  his  own  country.  A 
diocesan  synod  met  in  Prague,  August  27.  The  day  before, 
Huss,  who  was  in  the  city,  had  posted  up  against  the  cathedral 
and  the  churches,  and  at  the  gateways  of  the  palaces  of  the 
archbishop  and  the  king,  notices  in  Latin,  German  and  Czech 

*  Finke,  Acta  cone,  const.,  p.  177.     This  author  gives  valuable  documents 
bearing  on  the  convention  of  the  council.     See  also  Mansi,  28  :  3  sqq. 


i66  JOHN  HUSS 

that  he  was  ready  to  defend  himself  and  his  orthodoxy  before 
the  synod.  Copies  are  preserved.^  He  was  denied  admittance 
to  the  sittings.  Interpreting,  however,  the  synod's  silence 
as  a  confession  of  his  innocence,  he  again  posted  up  at  the 
gateway  of  the  royal  palace  in  the  old  town  a  notice  intended 
for  the  king  and  queen  to  the  effect  that  in  the  archbishop's 
court  "no  one  in  the  whole  kingdom  of  Bohemia"  had  ap- 
peared against  him.  He  was  ready  to  appear  before  the  pope 
and  the  council  assured  that,  if  accused  of  heresy,  he  would 
receive  a  verdict  of  not  guilty.  But,  should  he  be  pronounced 
a  heretic,  he  would  not  shrink  from  suffering  the  punishment 
appointed  for  heretics. 

From  the  papal  inquisitor  Nicholas,  bishop  of  Nazareth, 
he  received  a  certificate  of  good  standing,  which  bears  a 
notary's  seal,  dated  August  30,  1414.  In  an  open  audience 
in  which  Jesenicz  and  other  friends  of  Huss  were  present, 
the  inquisitor  affirmed  that  he  had  often  been  present  when 
Huss  preached,  talked  with  him  over  matters  of  Scripture 
and  met  him  many  times  at  the  hospitable  board,  and  that, 
far  from  finding  him  a  heretic,  he  had  always  found  him  to  be 
"a  true  and  Catholic  man,  who  had  no  taint  of  heresy  about 
him."  From  this  deposition  the  amiable  prelate  was  afterward 
known  as  the  bishop-sup-with-the-devil.^ 

At  still  another  synod,  held  in  October,  and  according  to 
the  sealed  attestation  of  the  supreme  Burgrave  of  Prague 
and  others.  Archbishop  Konrad,  in  answer  to  a  question  put 
by  Huss's  friends,  affirmed  that  he  knew  of  no  heresy  or  error 
of  which  Huss  could  be  justly  accused. 

Writing  to  Sigismund,  September  i,  1414,  Huss  an- 
nounced his  purpose  of  proceeding  to  Constance  under  the 
protection  of  the  king's  passport,  providing  safety  on  the 
journey — salvus  conducius.  He  begged  the  king  to  secure 
for  him  a  safe  hearing  in  public  and  expressed  his  willingness 

^  Mon.,  I  :  2.     Doc,  p.  66. 

*  Mon,,  I  :  3.     Mladenowicz  in  Doc,  239,  243. 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     167 

to  die,  if  necessary,  for  Christ  and  his  most  true  law.  In 
secret  he  had  taught  nothing.  What  he  had  spoken,  he  had 
spoken  in  public  places  where  professors  and  university  grad- 
uates, priests,  nobles,  and  other  men  met. 

In  the  meantime  Huss's  enemies  were  not  asleep.  Sealed 
depositions  were  taken  from  John  of  Protiva,  a  former  in- 
cumbent of  Bethlehem  chapel,  and  Andrew  of  Broda,  Huss's 
bitter  foe,  to  be  used  against  him  at  the  council.  On  the 
basis  of  sermons  they  had  heard  and  of  rumors  they  had 
picked  up  on  the  streets,  these  men  testified,  among  other 
things,  that  Huss  held  to  the  remanence  of  the  bread  after 
the  words  of  institution  and  to  the  incompetence  of  priests 
in  mortal  sin  to  absolve.  These  depositions  were  in  Huss's 
hands  at  Krakowec  before  he  set  out  for  Constance.  Copies 
with  his  interlineations  and  notes  are  still  extant.^ 

On  October  11,  1414,  the  journey  to  Constance  began. 
Our  account  of  its  stages  is  derived  in  part  from  Huss's  own 
letters  and  in  part  from  Mladenowicz,  one  of  his  companions 
who  remained  with  him  until  the  end,  even  to  standing  by 
at  the  stake  and  watching  his  friend's  dying  agony.  Huss 
had  been  placed  by  Sigismund  and  Wenzel  under  the  protec- 
tion of  three  Bohemian  nobles,  John  of  Chlum,  Henry  of 
Chlum,  his  uncle,  and  Wenzel  of  Duba.  John  of  Chlum  and 
Wenzel  of  Duba  had  fought  with  Sigismund  in  his  Venetian 
campaign  on  account  of  Zara.  Huss's  expenses  were  met  from 
contributions  made  by  his  friends.  A  charge  with  which  he 
was  frequently  pHed  at  Constance  was  that  he  had  been  made 
rich  by  the  gifts  of  his  influential  supporters.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  was  worried  during  the  progress  of  his  journey 
lest  he  should  want  for  the  necessities  of  life,  and  more  worried 
during  his  imprisonment  in  Constance  about  the  repayment 
of  the  moneys  advanced.  A  handsome  horse  and  a  carriage 
were  given  him  by  Lord  Pflug  of  Rabstein  and  another  horse 
by  another  nobleman.  In  a  parting  letter,  written  to  his 
^  Palacky,  Gesch.,  3  :  i,  p.  314. 


i68  JOHN  HUSS 

Bohemian  friends,  whom  he  calls  brothers  and  sisters,  he 
expressed  some  doubt  whether  he  would  see  them  again 
aHve.  He  called  them  to  witness  that  he  had  publicly  pre- 
sented the  Word  of  God  and  presented  it  without  heresy 
and  without  errors.  He  assured  them  he  was  no  heretic. 
He  spoke  seriously  of  the  great  dangers  which  lay  before  him 
and  the  possibility  of  his  being  put  to  death,  but,  if  by  his 
death  he  might  contribute  to  God's  glory  and  their  advantage, 
he  interceded  that  it  might  please  God  to  enable  him  to  meet 
death  without  sinful  fear  and,  if  it  should  please  God  to 
bring  him  back,  they  would  be  all  the  more  joyful  at  seeing 
each  other  and  assuredly  so  if  they  should  not  meet  until 
they  met  in  heaven.  Constance,  whither  he  was  going,  held 
many  and  influential  enemies,  and  he  asked  their  prayers 
for  the  gift  of  wisdom  and  constancy  by  the  Holy  Spirit  that 
he  might  be  preserved  in  the  midst  of  his  enemies,  well  remem- 
bering that  Christ  had  left  an  example  of  patient  suffering 
under  trial,  imprisonment,  and  even  death. ^ 

As  a  precautionary  measure,  Huss  put  a  sealed  will  into 
the  hands  of  his  favorite  pupil,  marked  with  instructions 
that  it  should  not  be  opened  except  in  case  of  his  death.  He 
called  upon  Martin  to  be  true  to  the  vow  of  chastity,  to 
guard  himself  against  all  temptations  to  incontinence,  and 
to  recall  what  he  had  been  taught  by  Huss  from  his  youth 
up — to  act  as  a  servant  of  Jesus  Christ.  He  reminded  Martin 
that  he  had  hated  the  avarice  and  the  incontinent  lives  of 
the  clergy,  and  he  warned  him  against  giving  away  to  the 
desire  for  fine  clothes,  high  position,  and  against  being  seduced 
by  the  bad  customs  of  the  day.  Huss  also  reminded  him  of 
his  own  manner  of  life  before  his  ordination  and  begged 
Martin  not  to  imitate  him  in  any  folly  Martin  might  have 
seen  in  him.  It  is  here  Huss  mentions  his  fondness  for  chess, 
to  which  reference  has  already  been  made,  a  game,  he  said, 
at  which  he  had  wasted  much  time  and  had  provoked  himself 

1  Doc,  ^l-n■ 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     169 

as  well  as  others  to  displays  of  anger.  For  his  innumerable 
sins  he  asked  the  young  man's  pardon  as  he  also  asked  his 
pra3^ers.  He  closed  the  document  by  bequeathing  to  Martin 
a  gray  cloak,  if  he  chose  to  have  it,  and  a  white  cloak  to  the 
parish  priest.  In  case  he  did  not  care  for  the  gray  cloak, 
Huss  asked  him  to  give  it  to  his  faithful  servant,  George, 
or  in  its  stead  a  guinea. 

Huss's  party  consisted  of  thirty  persons,  all  mounted. 
In  addition  to  the  three  delegates  appointed  by  Sigismund, 
there  were  John,  Cardinal  of  Reinstein,  who  had  for  a  long 
time  acted  as  Wenzel's  diplomatic  agent,  and  John  of  Chlum's 
amanuensis  and  clerk,  Peter  of  Mladenowicz.  As  he  was  de- 
parting, among  the  many  who  expressed  fears  that  he  was 
starting  on  a  journey  from  which  he  would  not  return  was 
Jerome  of  Prague. 

The  route  led  through  Biernau,  Neustadt,  Sulzbach, 
Hersbruck  and  Lauf  to  Niirnberg,  which  the  party  reached 
October  19,  and  from  thence  by  way  of  Biberach  in  Wiir- 
temberg  and  Ravensburg  on  the  lake  of  Constance.  From 
Ravensburg  they  took  boat  to  the  city  toward  which  their 
faces  were  turned.  Notes  left  us  in  Huss's  own  letters  give 
a  chatty  account  of  the  experiences  by  the  way.  Nowhere 
did  he  veil  his  identity.  In  spite  of  warnings  that  he  had 
powers  of  sorcery,  given  by  the  bishop  of  Lebus,  a  canon 
of  Prague,  who  preceded  the  party  from  place  to  place  by  a 
day's  journey,  he  was  everywhere  kindly  received.  The 
papal  interdict  was  nowhere  enforced.  Teutons  as  well  as 
Latins,  officials,  and  people  of  all  classes  everywhere  turned 
out  to  see  him  as  if,  so  he  wrote,  they  were  going  to  a  fair.^ 
Priests  and  magistrates  entertained  him. 

At  Biernau  the  parish  priest  received  him  into  his  house 
and  set  before  him  a  large  tankard  of  wine.  At  Niirnberg, 
where  he  had  a  notable  reception,  a  few  months  before  Sigis- 
mund had  gone  the  rounds  of  the  churches  and  worn  the 

»  Doc,  79,  83,  245  sq. 


r 


170  JOHN  HUSS 

skull  of  St.  Cyprian.  The  priest  of  St.  Sebaldus  and  other 
priests,  and  also  the  city  officials  had  a  conference  with  him 
lasting  four  hours.  In  the  company  was  a  Carthusian  doctor 
who  disputed  with  him  at  length,  but,  in  spite  of  this,  he 
felt  that  there  was  not  an  enemy  among  them  all,  and  he 
was  surprised  to  find  among  the  Germans  as  much  cordiality 
as  was  shown  by  his  own  people,  the  Bohemians.  John 
of  Chlum  and  Wenzel  of  Duba  were  indefatigable  in  render- 
ing good  service  and,  as  Huss  asserts,  acted  as  heralds  of 
the  truth.  Farther  on  in  the  journey,  at  Biberach,  John 
argued  so  shrewdly  with  the  priests  and  other  men  of  culture 
on  the  papal  prerogative  that  the  rumor  spread  that  he  was 
a  doctor  of  divinity.  Using  the  incident,  Huss  playfully 
nicknamed  him  doctor  of  Piberach. 

At  Niirnberg,  Wenzel  of  Duba,  turned  aside  and  pro- 
ceeded northward,  to  Spires,  to  secure  from  the  king  the 
official  passport — salvus  condudus.  Again  and  again  Huss 
refers  to  the  fact  that  the  journey  had  been  made  without 
passport  although  he  had  received  the  promise  of  it  from 
Sigismund.  The  party  reached  Constance  on  a  Sabbath, 
November  3,  and  was  met  outside  the  city  by  a  great  throng. 
The  people  accompanied  him  until  he  came  to  the  house  of 
a  widow,  Fida,  who  lived  near  the  Schnetzthor,  where  Huss 
lodged.  The  house  still  stands  on  the  street  now  called 
the  Hussgasse  and  bears  a  bronze  tablet  placed  there  by 
fellow  Bohemians,  1878,  containing  the  inscription  in  German 
and  Czech — The  Lodging  of  the  Bohemian  Reformer,  Master 
J.  Huss,  1414.  The  throng  was  attracted  in  part  by  curiosity 
to  see  the  heretic  and  in  part  by  a  parade  which  it  was  an- 
nounced the  pope,  cardinals,  and  other  dignitaries  were  to 
make  on  that  day  but  which  was  frustrated  by  the  pope's 
sudden  illness.^  Barons  John  of  Chlum  and  Lacembok 
went  immediately  to  the  bishop's  palace,  where  the  pope  was 
stopping,  and  laid  Huss's  case  before  him.  The  pope  gave 
'  Finke,  Acta,  p.  163. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE     171 

them  the  assurance  that  no  violence  would  be  employed, 
no,  not  even  if  Huss  were  charged  with  killing  John's  own 
brother.  They  pleaded  Sigismund's  solemn  pledge.  But  his 
enemies  were  in  readiness  and  the  very  day  after  Huss's 
arrival,  Michael  de  Causis  posted  up  a  notice  against  the 
cathedral  that  he  and  his  supporters  had  opened  proceedings 
against  John  Huss,  obstinate,  excommunicate,  and  suspected 
of  heresy.^ 

Constance,  now  a  city  of  Baden,  was  for  the  moment  the 
centre  to  which  all  eyes  in  Western  Europe  were  turned.  Even 
the  emperor  of  Byzantium  had  been  in  correspondence  with 
Sigismund  about  attendance  upon  the  council.  Nieheim  and 
other  writers  of  the  day  praised  the  beauty  of  its  location 
and  the  salubriousness  of  the  climate.  The  picture  given 
of  the  city  in  Van  der  Hardt  shows  in  the  foreground  the 
Dominican  convent,  situated  on  an  island,  in  which  Huss 
was  to  be  imprisoned,  behind  it  the  city,  walled  and  divided 
into  two  parts  by  a  wide  street,  and  to  the  north  the  river 
Rhine.  It  had  been  an  important  metropolis  for  the  over- 
land trade  from  Venice  and  Lombardy.  The  old  stock  ex- 
change, the  Kauffhaus,  still  standing,  was  built  in  1387. 
It  was  made  an  imperial  city  by  the  family  of  the  Hohen- 
staufen,  and  was  visited  by  the  distinguished  members  of 
that  house,  Frederick  Barbarossa,  Henry  VI,  and  Frederick 
II,  as  well  as  by  young  Konradin  on  his  unfortunate  journey 
to  Italy  to  receive  his  grandfather's  crown  and  to  meet  with 
his  pitiful  death,  1268.  The  seat  of  a  bishop,  the  see  of  Con- 
stance at  one  time  included  a  large  part  of  Wiirtemberg,  Ba- 
den, Switzerland.  With  its  incumbent,  in  the  early  part  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  Zwingli  had  to  do.  The  see  was  abolished 
in  1826. 

A  week  before  Huss's  arrival,  John  XXIII  had  entered 
the  city  in  great  style,  riding  on  a  white  palfrey  covered  with 
a  red  cloth  and  accompanied  by  nine  cardinals  and  sixteen 
'  Doc,  77,  78.     Palacky,  Gesch.,  p.  320. 


172  JOHN  HUSS 

hundred  mounted  horsemen,  the  bridles  of  his  horse  being 
held  by  the  count  of  Montferrat  and  an  Orsini.  The  city 
magistrates  furnished  the  bishop's  palace,  where  the  pope 
lodged,  with  four  large  casks  of  French  wine,  four  of  Elsass, 
and  eight  of  native  wines,  and  the  citizens  of  Constance  made 
him  a  gift  of  a  large  drinking-cup  made  of  silver  gilded  with 
gold.^  The  city  attracted  people  of  every  rank  bent  on  all 
sorts  of  business.  Such  a  scene  on  so  grand  a  scale  had  not 
been  witnessed  in  the  West  before.  It  was  a  golden  occasion 
for  social  and  mercantile  intercourse,  for  pride  and  display 
as  well  as  a  religious  event  concerning  the  well-being  of 
Latin  Christendom.  In  comparison  with  this  assembly,  the 
synod  at  Clermont,  1095,  the  fourth  Lateran,  12 15,  and  the 
councils  held  in  Lyons,  1245  and  1274,  were  provincial  synods. 
Here  all  CathoUc  nations  were  represented  by  delegations 
from  Bohemia  to  Scotland.  The  chief  scholarship  of  the 
age  as  well  as  the  leading  prelates  were  there.  The  normal 
population  of  the  city,  which  was  under  six  thousand,  was 
enormously  swollen  by  the  flood  of  strangers,  whose  number  is 
put  at  from  fifty  thousand  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand 
by  Richental,  a  resident  of  the  city  who,  twenty  years  after  the 
council  adjourned,  wrote  down  a  graphic  account  of  what  he 
had  seen.  He  had  the  interest  of  a  modern  reporter,  went 
everywhere,  into  alley  and  palace,  from  house  to  house,  tak- 
ing down  notes.  His  busy  pen  preserved  the  names  of  all 
the  visiting  dignitaries,  civil  and  religious,  together  with  their 
retainers.  There  were  thirty  thousand  beds  for  strangers. 
Five  hundred  are  said  to  have  been  drowned  in  the  lake 
during  the  progress  of  the  council.  Bakers,  grooms,  gold- 
smiths, scribes,  money-changers,  merchantmen,  and  sutlers 
of  every  sort,  even  to  traffickers  from  the  Orient,  flocked 
together  to  minister  to  the  needs  and  tastes  of  princes  and 
prelates.  According  to  the  tables  of  Richental  there  were 
in  attendance  33  cardinals,  5  patriarchs,  47  archbishops,  145 
*  Richental,  25-28. 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     173 

bishops,  93  titular  bishops,  217  doctors  of  theology,  361  doc- 
tors of  both  laws,  and  171  doctors  of  medicine.  Thirty-seven 
universities  were  represented.  There  were  83  envoys  rep- 
resenting kings  and  princes,  38  dukes,  173  counts,  71  barons, 
more  than  1,500  knights,  and  also  142  writers  of  bulls,  1,700 
buglers,  fiddlers,  and  other  players  on  musical  instruments. 
In  addition,  the  chronicler  informs  us,  there  were  700 
women  of  the  street  who  openly  practised  their  trade  in 
rented  rooms,  while  the  number  who  practised  it  secretly 
was  not  recorded.^ 

The  arrival  of  different  delegations  caused  great  excite- 
ment. The  English  and  Scotch,  numbering  a  dozen  and 
accompanied  by  seven  or  eight  hundred  mounted  men, 
were  headed  by  fifers  and  other  musicians  as  they  entered 
the  city  January  21,  141 5.  The  representatives  of  the 
university  of  Paris,  who  arrived  in  February,  awakened 
equal  interest.  The  entry  of  John  of  Nassau,  archbishop  of 
Mainz,  attended  by  700  mounted  followers,  created  a  sensa- 
tion. The  archbishop  was  clad  in  full  armor — ^helmet,  coat 
of  mail,  and  greaves.  January  17,  141 5,  King  Sigismund 
went  out  to  meet  Duke  Lewis  of  Bavaria,  who  was  accom- 
panied by  the  bishops  of  Spires  and  Treves  and  a  retinue  of 
400  horsemen.  The  streets  presented  the  spectacle  of  a 
merry  fair.  There  were  tournaments,  dances,  acrobatic  shows, 
processions,  and  musical  displays.  The  poHce  regulations  were 
precise.  Riding  and  shouting  at  night  were  forbidden.  After 
dark,  chains  were  stretched  across  some  of  the  streets,  and 
persons  going  out  after  curfew  were  to  carry  their  own  lights. 
Regulated  prices  for  food  and  laundering  were  intended  to 
check  extortion. 

The  most  eminent  personages  in  attendance,  after  Sigis- 
mund and  the  pope,  were  Cardinals  d'Ailly,  Zabarella  and 
Fillastre,  Hallum,  bishop  of  Sahsbury,  who  died  during  the 

'  Van  der  Hardt,  s  :  50-53,  gives  the  number  of  visitors  as  18,000  prelates 
and  priests,  80,000  laymen,  including  1,500  loose  women. 


f 


174  JOHN  HUSS 

sessions  and  was  buried  at  Constance,  and  John  Gerson  of 
Paris.  Fillastre  left  a  valuable  journal  of  the  council's  pro- 
ceedings. 

Now  and  then  in  Huss's  letters  we  catch  entertaining 
glimpses  of  the  functions  that  were  going  on  in  the  city  and 
the  gossip  that  passed  from  mouth  to  mouth  on  its  streets. 
A  rumor  which  he  mentioned  proved  untrue,  that  Benedict 
XIII  was  on  his  way  to  Constance.  The  asses  the  cardinals 
rode  on,  he  tells  us,  were  scrubs.  On  his  arrival  he  found 
many  Bohemians  already  stranded,  and  he  wrote  requesting 
aid  for  them.  He  chats  about  the  price  of  horses  and  how 
he  had  sent  his  own  horse,  Rabstein,  back  to  Ravensburg. 
He  had  kept  it  that  he  might  be  ready,  if  necessary,  to  ride 
outside  the  city  to  meet  the  king,  who,  however,  so  the  rumor 
went,  was  not  to  arrive  until  Christmas  Day.  John  of  Chlum, 
he  says,  was  protecting  him  right  manfully  and  like  a  true 
knight,  and  doing  more  preaching  than  he  himself. 

To  Huss's  misfortune,  even  the  liberty  of  his  lodging  in 
widow  Fida's  house  was  quickly  to  be  taken  from  him,  and 
from  thenceforth  only  such  rumors  reached  him  as  penetrated 
through  prison  walls.  His  hopes  of  a  fair  and  open  audience 
were  doomed  to  bitter  disappointment.  The  orderly  procedure 
and  solemn  attention  to  business  which  he  had  looked  forward 
to  gave  away  before  the  actual  impression  of  another  sort. 
He  complained  of  unfairness  for  himself  and  his  Bohemian 
friends.  Of  the  general  conditions  prevailing  in  the  city  he 
wrote  that  "this  council  is  the  scene  of  great  foulness,  for 
V  I  hear  it  said  by  the  Swabians,  as  though  it  were  a  proverb, 
that  a  generation  will  not  suffice  to  purge  Constance  from 
the  sins  which  it  has  committed  in  the  city."^  His  numerous 
L-  enemies  were  indefatigable  in  creating  and  encouraging  an 
unfavorable  sentiment  against  him,  insisting  that  he  be 
treated  as  a  heretic.  Michael  de  Causis,  as  has  been  said, 
was  there.     So  also  was  Peter  Palecz  and  the  Iron  Bishop, 

1  Doc,  p.  139. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  175 

Leitomysl.  The  day  after  Huss's  arrival,  Michael  posted 
up  formal  notice  of  the  proceedings,  in  which  he  was  to  be 
a  prosecutor.  Palecz  and  Michael  not  only  drew  up  charges 
from  his  Treatise  on  the  Church,  but  actually  went  about 
among  the  cardinals,  archbishops,  and  other  prelates  to  stir 
up  prejudice  against  him  or  confirm  suspicion,  associating 
with  themselves  in  this  business  members  of  the  Dominican 
order.^  Huss's  hope  was  in  Sigismund,  not  yet  on  the  ground, 
and  supremely  in  Christ,  whom  he  called  "his  strong  cham- 
pion"—6e//a/or  fortis. 

On  November  9,  the  week  after  Huss's  arrival,  John 
XXIII,  in  answer  to  the  request  of  Huss's  friends,  sent  word 
that  the  interdict  was  suspended  and  that  Huss  was  free  to  go 
to  and  fro  in  the  city  and  in  the  churches,  with  the  caution 
that  he  should  not  attend  high  masses  and  should  avoid 
mixing  with  the  people.  This  seemed  to  be  a  good  omen. 
And,  as  we  learn  from  a  letter  written  by  John  of  Reinstein, 
Huss  was  celebrating  mass  daily  in  his  lodgings;  but  the 
same  authority  bears  witness  to  the  uneasiness  in  the  city 
occasioned  by  Huss's  presence.  He  speaks  of  a  false  rumor 
circulated,  he  knew  not  by  friend  or  foe,  to  the  effect  that 
Huss  was  to  preach  in  the  cathedral  on  the  Sabbath  after 
he  was  writing,  and  that  he  had  promised  a  ducat  to  every 
one  who  was  present  to  listen  to  his  strictures  upon  the  clergy. 
This  valuable  letter  closes  with  a  reference  to  Huss's  name, 
that  the  Goose  is  not  yet  cooked  and  not  afraid  of  being 
cooked,  for  geese  were  not  eaten  on  that  St.  Martinmas, 
which  happened  to  fall  on  Saturday,  a  day  when  geese  were 
not  eaten.  With  all  who  came  to  his  lodgings  Huss  spoke 
freely,  but  he  was  wise  in  not  going  beyond  his  lodgings,  as 
John  of  Chlum  distinctly  stated. 

But  Huss,  after  all,  was  a  heretic  and  under  the  ban  of 
the  curia.     His  liberty  was  an  offense  to  the  rigorous  party, 
continually  reminded  by  the  hostile  Bohemians  of  the  cer- 
^  Mon.,  I  :  318.     Doc,  p.  246. 


176  JOHN  HUSS 

tainty  of  Huss's  heresy.  Even  if  it  had  been  canonical,  it 
was  not  safe  to  allow  him  to  be  free.  When  he  was  arrested, 
the  arrest  was  accomphshed  under  the  garb  of  duplicity. 
On  November  28,  less  than  a  month  after  Huss's  entry 
into  Constance,  the  mayor  of  the  city,  Hans  of  Baden,  and 
the  bishops  of  Trent  and  Augsburg  appeared  at  the  widow's 
lodgings  near  the  Schnetzthor  and  announced  that  the  pope 
and  cardinals  were  ready  to  give  Huss  a  hearing  and  that 
they  were  sent  to  conduct  him  to  their  presence.  John  of 
Chlum  saw  through  the  ruse,  and,  rising  to  his  feet,  appealed 
to  the  king's  safe-conduct  and  his  announcement  that  it  was 
his  will  that  nothing  be  done  to  Huss  until  his  arrival.  He 
charged  the  party  with  defying  the  king's  honor.  Addressing 
the  mayor,  Chlum  said  in  German:  ''If  the  devil  came  to  have 
his  case  tried  he  ought  to  have  a  fair  and  honest  hearing." 

When  the  bishop  of  Trent  remarked  that  they  were  there 
in  the  interests  of  peace  and  to  prevent  disturbance,  Huss 
rose  from  the  table  and  declared  that  he  had  not  come  to 
present  his  case  before  the  pope  and  the  curia,  but  before 
the  whole  council  sitting  in  session.  Nevertheless,  he  was 
ready  to  go  before  the  pope  and  the  cardinals.  In  the  mean- 
time the  soldiery  had  surrounded  the  house.  Giving  himself 
up  and,  as  he  was  descending  the  stairway,  Huss  met  his 
hostess.  She  took  leave  of  him  with  tears  while  he  invoked 
upon  her  the  divine  blessing.  Then,  mounted  upon  a  httle 
horse,  he  was  led  through  a  vast  and  curious  crowd  to  the 
bishop's  palace.  The  language  used  by  the  bishop  of  Trent 
points  to  the  unrest  in  Constance  over  Huss's  unrestricted 
freedom,  and  it  would  seem  not  unreasonable  that  mob  vio- 
lence was  feared. 

The  arrest,  as  asserted  by  Mladenowicz,  was  at  the  direct 
instigation  of  Palecz  and  Michael  de  Causis.  The  charge  is 
made  by  Richental  that  Huss  had  attempted  to  flee  by 
concealing  himself  in  a  wagon  loaded  with  hay.  Richental, 
as  has  been  said,  wrote  twenty  years  after  this  alleged  event. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     177 

and  his  story  is  in  flat  contradiction  to  Mladenowicz's  ac- 
count. As  told  by  him,  the  story  ran  that  the  wagon  was 
discovered  by  Lacembok,  who  called  upon  the  mayor  of  the 
city  to  have  all  the  gates  closed  and  Huss  seized.  Huss  was 
at  once  delivered  up  to  John  XXIII  and  imprisoned  by  him. 
One  feature  of  the  tale,  unlikely  upon  its  face,  is  that  Lacem- 
bok,  a  warm  friend,  was  responsible  for  the  detection  and 
seizure.  The  date  given,  March  3,  141 5,  is  also  impossible, 
being  three  months  after  Huss  was  put  in  close  confinement.^ 
It  is  possible  that  a  vague  rumor  was  afloat  that,  in  view  of 
the  strong  sentiment  against  him,  Huss  had  been  attempting 
to  make  his  escape,  and  it  is  also  possible  that  Michael  may 
have  made  use  of  these  rumors  in  urging  Huss's  arrest. 

From  this  moment  on,  Huss  had  no  chance.  He  was  ~| 
treated  as  a  criminal — his  case  was  prejudged.  He  was  in  I 
the  position  of  a  guilty  man.  Much  as  d'Ailly,  Zabarella, 
and  others  may  have  been  in  favor  of  dealing  with  him  fairly, 
the  views  accredited  to  him  were  obnoxious  to  the  age.  One 
course  and  one  only  was  open  to  Huss — retraction.  His  arrest 
confirmed  him  in  the  fear  that  he  would  be  obHged  to  retract 
or  suffer  death.  Mladenowicz  reports  him  as  having  said  to 
the  bishop  of  Trent,  when  he  was  about  to  obey  the  summons 
to  leave  his  lodgings:  "I  would  choose  death  rather  than  J 

deny  the  truth  as  I  have  learned  it  from  the  Scriptures  and 
otherwise."  From  now  on  his  position  was  similar  to  Luther's 
position  before  Cardinal  Cajetan  at  Augsburg.  The  cardinal 
called  upon  Luther  to  retract,  refusing  to  allow  him  to  argue. 

Introduced  into  the  presence  of  the  pope  and  the  cardi- 
nals, Huss  was  told  that  reports  had  come  from  many  quarters 
that  he  had  sown  many  errors  in  Bohemia.  To  this  Huss 
replied  that  he  would  rather  die  than  hold  errors.  Of  his 
free  will,  he  had  come  to  the  council,  and  he  was  willing  to 

^  Doc,  247.  Richental,  58.  Palacky,  Gesch.,  p.  322.  Wylie,  pp.  139  sqq. 
Helfert,  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  also  rejects  the  tale.  Palacky  suggests  that 
Richental  may  have  confused  Huss  with  Jerome,  who  made  his  escape  from, 
Constance  after  his  first  arrest. 


178  JOHN  HUSS 

be  corrected  if  he  was  found  to  hold  errors.  The  cardinals 
pronouncing  the  words  well  spoken,  retired  for  consultation. 
While  Huss  was  waiting  for  their  return  a  Franciscan,  whose 
name  was  afterward  learned  to  be  Didacus,  entered  the  room 
and  drew  Huss  into  a  conversation.  Mladenowicz  says  he 
was  suborned  to  entrap  Huss.  Pretending  to  be  an  ignorant 
and  unlearned  man  seeking  instruction,  he  inquired  whether 
Huss  believed  that  after  the  words  of  institution  the  material 
bread  remains.  Huss  denied  it  and,  when  the  monk  expressed 
surprise,  repeated  his  denial  a  second  and  a  third  time. 

Here  John  of  Chlum  interfered  and  pronounced  it  an 
unheard  of  insult  to  call  upon  a  man  to  repeat  his  solemn 
affirmation  even  to  the  third  time.  The  monk  then  protested 
that  the  knight  must  not  find  fault  with  him  for  he  was  a 
simple  and  unlearned  man,  and  he  went  on  to  ask  Huss 
about  the  hypostatical  union  of  the  divinity  with  humanity 
in  Christ's  person.  Throwing  off  a  remark  in  Bohemian 
that  his  visitor  was  not  after  all  a  simple  and  unlearned  man, 
Huss  accused  the  monk  of  duplicity  and  tried  to  show  it  from 
the  nature  of  his  questions.  The  Franciscan  then  withdrew 
with  an  expression  of  thanks.  Huss  was  informed  later  by 
the  attendants  of  John  XXHI  that  Didacus  was  reputed 
to  be  the  most  subtle  theologian  of  Lombardy.  On  hearing 
this,  he  expressed  his  regret  that  he  had  not  known  it,  for  he 
would  have  plied  him  with  the  Scriptures  and  not  have 
answered  as  he  did.^ 

When  the  cardinals  reappeared  at  4  p.  m.,  Palecz  and 
Michael  and  also  John  of  Reinstein,  Mladenowicz,  and  others 
were  present.  Palecz  and  Michael  gave  their  elation  vent 
in  acts  and  words  and  piqued  John  of  Reinstein  on  Huss's 
being  trapped  at  last  and  being  in  the  way  of  getting  his 
deserts.  He  would  not  get  off  until  he  had  paid  the  utter- 
most   farthing.      In    the    evening,    the   pope's    chamberlain 

*  This   incident   is  one  of  those  portions  cut  out  of  Palacky's  History  oj 
Bohemia  by  the  censor  in  the  edition  of  1845. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  179 

informed  Huss  that  he  was  to  be  kept  under  guard.  In  vain 
did  John  of  Chlum  hasten  to  the  pontiff,  who  was  still  in 
audience  with  the  cardinals,  and  complain  that  he  had  broken 
his  pledged  word  to  protect  Huss  against  violence.  He  again 
appealed  to  the  promise  given  by  Sigismund.  The  cardinals 
present  the  pope  called  to  witness  that  the  arrest  was  none 
of  his  doings  and,  drawing  John  aside,  whispered:  "You 
know  how  I  stand  with  the  cardinals.  They  gave  him  over 
to  me.  I  had  to  receive  him  as  a  captive."  The  Franciscan 
monk,  so  he  stated,  had  not  been  sent  by  him  and  was  a 
base  fellow. 

That  night  Huss  was  taken  to  the  house  of  a  canon  of 
Constance,  where  a  cardinal  was  lodging.  After  a  week's 
detention  he  was  removed,  December  6,  1414,  to  the  Domini- 
can convent,  where  he  remained  in  close  confinement  until 
the  last  of  March,  141 5.  Here  he  was  thrown  into  a  dungeon 
hard  by  the  latrines.  Carpenters  and  other  mechanics  had 
been  engaged  for  several  days  in  repairing  the  bolts  and 
locks  and  in  putting  up  six  beds  and  a  stove  for  the  guards. 

The  old  Black  Friars'  convent  was  transformed,  in  1875, 
into  the  Insul  Hotel,  one  of  the  most  picturesque  stopping- 
places  in  all  Europe.  Founded  in  1236,  it  was  the  retreat 
which  Amandus  Suso  entered,  and  where  he  gave  himself 
up  to  the  most  painful  and  exaggerated  self-mortifications. 
Here  Chrysoloras  was  formally  received  by  the  council, 
and  here  he  died,  1415.  Here  the  French  and  Italian  na- 
tions sat  during  the  sessions  of  the  council.  The  convent 
withstood  the  siege  of  the  Swedes  in  1633,  during  the  Thirty 
Years'  War.  In  the  period  of  the  Reformation  it  had  been 
used  as  a  hospital.  Taken  over  with  the  city  of  Constance 
by  Austria  in  1649,  it  was  again  occupied  by  the  friars.  In 
1785  Joseph  II  turned  it  over  to  a  colony  from  Geneva  with 
their  looms.  More  recently  Count  Zeppelin  was  born  there. 
The  chapel,  with  its  vaulted  roof,  now  serves  as  the  hotel 
dining-room.     Surrounded  by  an  attractive  garden  and  with 


i8o  JOHN   HUSS 

a  court  planted  with  flowers,  its  arches  overgrown  with  vines, 
the  structure  looks  out  upon  the  beautiful  lake  of  Constance. 

The  walls  of  the  inner  court  are  painted  with  frescos 
illustrating  historical  scenes  in  the  history  of  Constance  and 
the  convent  itself  from  600  to  1888 — the  date  when  the 
Emperor  WilHam  II  met  with  Adolph  of  Nassau  and  effected 
a  reconciliation  with  the  two  houses  they  represented,  sepa- 
rated in  1866.  One  of  the  smaller  pictures  represents  Huss 
chained.  The  tower  in  which  he  was  confined  still  remains. 
A  few  steps  away  is  the  Rhine  resuming  its  course  to  the  north. 
The  present  cheerful  surroundings,  bright  flowers,  shady 
walks,  the  groups  of  ducks  and  other  fowl  in  the  canals,  the 
sounds  of  daily  music  in  the  park — these  are  in  strong  con- 
trast to  Huss's  grim  imprisonment  and  the  harsh  methods 
of  the  inquisition  enacted  within  its  walls  five  hundred  years 
ago. 

The  unsanitary  condition  of  the  Dominican  prison  wrought, 
in  conjunction  with  the  prisoner's  undone  nervous  state, 
to  bring  Huss  to  the  very  verge  of  death.  Fever  set  in,  and 
so  desperate  was  his  plight  that  the  pope  sent  his  own 
physician  to  administer  clysters.  At  the  pope's  order,  Huss, 
January  8,  141 5,  was  transferred  to  another  and  less  un- 
wholesome apartment.  By  January  19,  he  was  sufficiently 
recovered  to  be  writing  again  to  his  friends.  The  purpose 
was  to  shut  him  out  from  the  world,  and  by  the  rigor  of 
prison  discipHne  to  bring  him  to  repentance.  Among  the 
books  which  he  had  with  him  was  a  copy  of  his  Commentary 
on  Peter  the  Lombard's  Sentences.  These  and  even  his  Vul- 
gate Bible  were  taken  from  him.  He  made  moving  appeals 
for  books,  and  his  case  easily  suggests  John  Tyndale  in  his 
prison  at  Vilvorde  begging  the  king  of  England  to  send  him  a 
Hebrew  grammar  and  Bible  to  while  away  the  lonesome  hours. 
In  February,  John  of  Chlum  was  able  to  get  a  Bible  into 
the  dungeon.  Huss  won  the  sympathy  of  his  jailer,  Robert, 
and    the    clerks  of   the  papal  household  treated  him  with 


/ 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  i8i 

kindness.  Through  Robert's  mediation  he  was  kept  in  com- 
munication with  his  friends  in  Constance.  At  his  request 
and  the  instance  of  his  other  guards,  Huss  wrote  short  trea- 
tises on  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  ten  commandments,  marriage, 
and  the  Lord's  Supper.^ 

A  prisoner  could  hardly  have  had  more  true  and  faithful 
friends  than  Huss  had  in  John  of  Chlum  and  Mladenowicz. 
To  their  sympathy  they  added  the  most  strenuous  efforts  to 
secure  for  him  release  and  a  fair  hearing.  Chlum  he  called 
the  dearest  of  friends,  the  noble  and  gracious  lord  and  guard- 
ian of  the  faith;  This  nobleman  posted  an  announcement 
on  the  cathedral  door,  December  15  and  24,  written  in 
German  and  Latin,  appealing  to  the  king's  passport. ^  On 
hearing  of  the  arrest,  Sigismund  is  said  to  have  broken  out 
in  a  rage,  swearing  he  would  break  down  the  doors  of  Huss's 
prison  if  he  were  not  released  before  his  arrival  in  Constance. 
His  peremptory  order  for  Huss's  release  was  disregarded. 

Huss's  letters  written  during  his  captivity  of  eight  months 
are  among  the  most  affecting  epistolary  collections  in  existence 
and  have  a  character  of  their  own.  Fifty  in  number,  they  were 
smuggled  out  of  the  prison  through  his  jailer,  Robert,  and 
other  guards.  They  begin  with  January  19,  141 5,  and  end 
with  letters  written  to  John  of  Chlum,  Wenzel  of  Duba,  and 
friends  in  Bohemia,  June  29,  141 5,  a  week  before  his  death. 
Workman,  who  has  given  an  excellent  translation  of  them, 
says:  "They  will  appeal  to  every  reader  by  their  tenderness 
and  true  piety."  ^  They  give  us  an  insight  into  the  writer's 
innermost  feelings,  his  affection  for  his  friends,  his  deep  in- 
terest in  the  progress  of  his  case,  and  the  events  occurring  at 
Constance.  They  are  full  of  Httle  details  bearing  upon  his 
health,  his  needs,  his  dreams,  the  news  from  Jerome,  the 
marriage  of  Wenzel  of  Duba.    Now  he  asks  John  of  Chlum 

'  Doc,  87,  99,  254.     It  seems  certain  that  Huss  had  with  him  a  copy  of  his 
own  Com.  on  Peter  the  Lombard :  Flajshans,  Mistr  Jan  Hits,  p.  360. 
-  Mon.,  I  :  95.     Eng.  transl.  of  the  placard,  Gillett,  i  :  395  sq. 
2  Workman,  Letters,  p.  172.    The  Latin  and  Czech  texts,  Doc,  83-150. 


i82  JOHN  HUSS 

to  send  him  another  shirt,  now  he  announces  that  his  writing 
material  is  getting  low  or  has  run  out.  One  of  his  communica- 
tions to  John  of  Chlum  was  written  on  a  ragged  three-cornered 
piece  of  paper. 

Huss  spent  whole  nights  scribbling  down  his  thoughts  in 
prose  and  rhyme  and  answering  the  charges  of  Palecz  and 
his  examiners.  1  He  could  not  sleep,  or  at  best  his  sleep  was 
broken  by  dreams.  One  night  in  March  he  dreamed  about 
Bethlehem  chapel  and  imagined  that  all  the  pictures  of 
Christ  that  hung  on  its  walls  were  in  danger  of  being  de- 
stroyed. Then  he  fancied  seeing  in  their  places  other  and 
more  beautiful  pictures,  painted  by  many  painters,  upon  which 
he  looked  with  delight.  He  heard  the  people  cry  out:  "Let 
the  bishops  and  priests  come  and  destroy  these  pictures  if 
they  will."  Then  there  was  great  rejoicing  at  Bethlehem. 
On  waking,  he  found  himself  laughing.  The  interpretation 
that  John  of  Chlum  put  upon  the  dream  was  that  the  Huss- 
ite preachers  had  painted  the  more  beautiful  pictures  and 
that  Huss,  the  Goose,  who  was  even  then  laid  on  the  altar, 
would  rejoice  in  heaven  as  he  looked  down  and  saw  the  pictures 
painted  by  the  old  priests  destroyed  and  replaced  by  others. 

But,  above  all,  in  his  letters  we  are  let  into  the  realm 
of  Huss's  religious  feelings.  During  his  imprisonment,  as 
he  takes  occasion  to  inform  us,  he  came  to  appreciate  for  the 
first  time  the  spiritual  comforts  hidden  in  the  Psalms,  that 
book  which  has  been  the  chief  Hturgy  of  devout  souls  in 
hours  of  penitence  and  praise,  in  the  midst  of  cares  and  dis- 
appointments, in  times  of  the  felt  need  of  aid  and  consolation. 
There,  as  he  said,  he  walked  with  the  Good  Shepherd,  who 
restoreth  the  soul  and  supplieth  all  the  wants  of  his  people. 

The  official  examination  was  conducted  through  commis- 
sioners appointed  by  the  council,  and,  at  the  last,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  council  as  a  whole  in  the  Franciscan  refectory. 
Huss  appeared  once  in  the  cathedral  and  once  only,  the  morn- 
» Doc,  89,  91,  96,  255, 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE    183 

ing  of  July  6,  1415,  when  the  sentence  of  death  was  pro- 
nounced. During  the  progress  of  the  trial  and  even  to  the 
end,  Palecz  and  Michael  de  Causis  continued  busy  formulating 
the  charges  and  acting  as  informants  to  the  commissions. 
From  the  first,  Huss  protested  that  he  had  come  to  Constance 
with  the  implied,  if  not  the  express,  assurance  from  the  king 
that  he  would  have  opportunity  to  make  a  public  statement 
of  his  case,  unimpeded  by  his  Bohemian  or  other  foes.  To 
the  end,  he  claimed  that  faith  was  broken.  The  official  testi- 
monies to  his  orthodoxy  secured  in  Prague  were  in  the  first 
instance  completely  ignored  and  he  was  treated  as  a  heretic; 
and,  from  the  very  first,  fettered  with  charges  made  by  his 
foes,  he  was  put  in  a  position  where  it  was  impossible,  or  at 
least  most  difl&cult,  for  him  to  get  an  impartial  verdict. 

The  first  examination,  which  took  place  December  4, 
1414,^  was  conducted  by  a  commission  of  three,  appointed 
by  John  XXIII,  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  the  bishop  of 
Lebus,  and  the  bishop  of  Citta  di  Costella.  The  last  examiner 
had  met  Jesenicz  in  Cracow,  1413,  and  succeeded  in  having 
him  expelled  from  the  city.  Among  the  witnesses  were  John 
of  Monsternberg  and  Peter  Storch,  originally  connected  with 
the  university  of  Prague  and  then  at  Leipzig,  Palecz,  Michael 
de  Causis,  Peter,  preacher  at  St.  Clements,  Prague,  the  abbot 
Peter  of  St.  Ambrose's,  Prague,  and  Dr.  Nicholas  Zeisel- 
meister  of  the  same  city.  On  one  occasion,  when  one  of  the 
witnesses,  a  layman,  was  called,  to  the  general  disappoint- 
ment he  deposed  that  he  had  nothing  to  say,  and  Michael  de 
Causis  exclaimed  that  as  for  himself  he  would  be  glad  to  testify 
against  his  own  father  if  his  father  held  anything  contrary  to 
the  faith. 

In  accordance  with  the  custom  in  cases  of  heresy,  no 
proctor  or  attorney  was  allowed  Huss,  though  he  had  re- 
quested one.-    The  defendant  was  confronted  by  the  com- 

'  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  255  sqq. 

"Doc,  84,  88.  See  Lea,  Inquis.  I  :  chap.  XI. 


i84  JOHN  HUSS 

mission  with  the  XLV  Articles  of  Wyclif  and  forty-two  articles 
taken  from  his  own  Treatise  on  the  Church  and  other  writings. 
To  these  he  was  given  opportunity  to  make  reply.  On  the 
one  hand,  he  entered  a  protest  that  many  of  the  charges  were 
flat  misrepresentations  and  that  others  containing  extracts 
from  his  works  also  misrepresented  his  views  by  taking  his 
words  out  of  their  connection.  Some  of  the  charges  he  pro- 
nounced to  be  pure  inventions  of  Palecz  and  others.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  reaffirmed  others  as  right,  as,  for  example, 
that  no  one  stained  with  mortal  sin  belongs  to  the  true  church, 
that  the  predestinate  have  a  radical  grace  from  which  it  is 
not  possible  for  them  to  fall,  and  that  princes  have  authority 
to  sequestrate  church  possessions  and  expel  unworthy  priests. 
In  regard  to  the  last  tenet,  he  bade  John  of  Chlum  to  tell 
Sigismund  that  if  it  were  condemned  as  heresy  the  king 
himself  would  be  open  to  condemnation  as  a  heretic  for 
having  deprived  bishops  of  their  temporal  goods,  as  his 
father,  Charles  IV,  had  done  before  him.  The  commission's 
recommendation  that  his  case  be  set  before  a  jury  of  twelve 
doctors,  Huss  rejected.  Later  on  Jesenicz  took  the  ground 
that  Huss  had  committed  a  technical  error  in  making  any 
reply  whatsoever  as  a  prisoner. 

In  addition  to  these  charges,  the  formal  articles  sent  by 
Gerson,  of  which  mention  has  already  been  made,  were 
brought  in  evidence  against  him.  He  promised  to  reply  to 
them,  if  he  lived.  These  divers  accusations  were  renewed 
again  and  again  during  the  progress  of  the  trial  with  small 
modification. 

Many  also  were  the  insinuations  with  which  Huss  was 
vexed.  For  example,  a  bishop  accused  him  of  setting  up  a 
new  law  as  well  as  having  preached  all  the  XLV  and  the 
forty-two  articles.  Writing  to  John  of  Chlum,  he  expressed 
the  opinion  that  the  commission  had  not  much  against  him 
except  that  he  had  preached  against  the  crusading  bulls, 
administered  the  sacraments  while  under  excommunication, 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  185 

and  had  appealed  from  the  pope.^  These  three  charges  were 
made  against  him  in  committee,  and  extracts  from  his 
treatise  against  indulgences  and  his  appeal  from  the  pope's 
decision  were  read  in  his  presence.  His  last  letter  written 
to  his  Bohemian  friends  before  leaving  Prague  was  also 
adduced  in  evidence  against  him.  Especially  damaging  were 
the  references  he  had  made  to  many  and  great  enemies  which 
he  affirmed  were  awaiting  him  at  Constance,  the  declara- 
tion that  the  most  relentless  of  his  enemies  were  persons  of 
his  own  household,  and  that  it  was  not  on  account  of  any 
heresy  he  was  going  to  Constance,  for  he  held  none.  Ag- 
gravating also  were  the  statements  that  he  was  ready  to 
die  if  by  his  death  he  might  glorify  God,  and  that  nothing 
but  the  help  of  God  could  protect  him  against  such  a  sentence. 
In  the  meantime,  an  event  of  prime  importance  in  the 
history  of  the  council  had  occurred — the  arrival  of  Sigis- 
mund.  This  prince  had  been  crowned  in  Aachen,  November 
8,  1414,  and  started  southward  four  days  later.  On  Christ- 
mas Eve,  or  rather  after  midnight  early  Christmas  morning, 
Sigismund  made  his  entry  into  Constance,  accompanied  by 
the  queen,  Barbara,  and  her  father  the  Count  of  Cilley. 
The  cold  was  intense.  After  changing  their  garments  and 
warming  themselves  for  an  hour,  they  proceeded  through 
the  wintry  streets  between  avenues  of  torches  and  under 
tapestries  of  gold  held  by  the  burgesses  to  the  cathedral  for 
the  matin  services  which  began  at  cockcrowing.  The  pope 
in  full  pontificals  received  them.  Clad  as  a  deacon  and  with 
the  crown  on  his  head,  the  king  intoned  the  service  and  read 
the  Scriptures  about  the  taxing  of  the  world  by  Caesar  Augus- 
tus and  the  birth  in  the  manger.  Mass  followed  mass,  no 
less  than  nine,  or  some  reports  say  eleven,  hours  being  spent 
in  the  solemn  services  in  the  cold  spaces  of  the  great  edifice. 
At  their  close,  John  conferred  on  the  king  a  sword  with  an 
admonition  to  protect  the  church. 

'  Doc,  89,  92. 


i86  JOHN  HUSS 

Both  on  the  part  of  the  council  and  of  Huss  and  his  friends 
much  was  expected  from  Sigismund,  who  was  compared  to 
Daniel  who  had  rescued  Susanna,  and,  as  if  he  were  another 
Charlemagne,  to  King  David.  But  he  also,  chief  prince 
though  he  was  of  Christendom,  showed  himself  unable  to 
resist  the  hierarchy  as  John  had  been  unable  to  resist  the 
cardinals  at  the  time  of  Huss's  arrest.  Prior  to  the  king's 
arrival,  the  councillors  had  spent  much  time  over  the  question, 
whether  the  king's  passport  to  a  suspect  of  heresy  was  vaUd, 
exempting  him  from  trial  and  arrest.  Their  conclusion  was 
in  the  negative.  A  suspect  was  to  be  dealt  with  according 
to  the  laws  of  the  church ,  just  as  if  no  such  civil  passport  had 
been  given.  At  first,  Sigismund  disputed  this  position  and 
on  several  occasions  withdrew  from  the  meetings  of  the 
council  in  anger.  He  even  threatened  to  abandon  Constance 
altogether  if  the  council  insisted  upon  its  interpretation. 
Finally,  when  he  saw  that  the  council  was  in  danger  of  break- 
ing up,  the  king  yielded.  For  such  an  issue  as  the  council's 
dissolution  Sigismund  was  not  willing  to  be  responsible.  It 
was  decided  that  the  trial  should  at  once  proceed  without 
further  impediment  on  the  part  of  the  monarch.^  Without 
doubt,  the  principle  was  fully  discussed  which  the  council 
solemnly  pronounced  after  Huss's  death,  namely,  that  word 
was  not  to  be  kept  with  a  heretic. 

Though  the  trial  was  to  proceed  strictly  according  to  the 
laws  of  the  church,  Sigismund  continued  to  be  looked  to  as 
in  a  greater  or  less  degree  responsible  for  Huss's  protection. 
His  word  had  been  given  and  his  passport  seems  to  have 
been  appealed  to  as  if  it  meant  that  Huss  was  to  be  immune 
from  all  violence  until  he  got  back  to  Bohemia.  In  this 
sense  was  it  understood  by  the  nobles  of  Bohemia  and  Moravia 
who  supported  Huss.  Early  in  1415  Moravian  barons 
addressed  to  the  king  a  protest  against  Huss's  arrest  and 

^De  inquisitione  Hussii  per  Casarem  non  amplius  impedienda,  Hardt,  4  :  32. 
Palacky,  Gesch.,  p.  329. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  187 

imprisonment.  They  reminded  him  of  his  promise  of  safe- 
conduct,  which  was  known  all  through  Moravia  and  Bohemia. 
Huss  had  started  from  Prague  ready  to  answer  the  charges 
made  against  him,  and  he  deserved  an  open  and  fair  hearing, 
even  as  he  himself  had  openly  and  without  fear  preached 
the  divine  law. 

On  the  other  hand,  foreign  influences  as  well  as  the  coun- 
cil's were  brought  to  bear  to  urge  upon  the  king  the  duty  of 
giving  Huss  short  shrift.  In  a  communication  addressed  to 
him  by  Ferdinand,  king  of  Aragon,  Ferdinand  expressed  his 
great  wonder  that  Sigismund  had  not  put  the  prisoner  to  death 
straight  off.  He  called  upon  the  king  to  proceed  without 
delay  to  mete  out  the  punishment  due  to  the  iniquitous 
John  Huss,  of  whom  he  had  heard  and  whom  God  had  con- 
demned. By  so  doing  he  would  gain  for  himself  an  eternal 
reward.  Would  not  the  king  without  parley  put  to  death 
even  a  wife,  a  mother,  or  a  child  who  should  attempt  to  per- 
suade him  to  worship  false  gods?  Was  it  not  written  that  a 
heretic,  after  he  has  been  warned  the  second  time,  should 
be  avoided? 

As  for  Huss  himself,  the  hope  which  Sigismund's  arrival 
had  started  must  soon  have  given  way  to  something  like 
despair.  He  must  have  felt  that  he  was  hoping  against  hope. 
He  had  felt  assured  that  he  could  accomplish  much,  if  he 
saw  the  king  face  to  face.  He  sent  requests  to  him  for  a 
personal  audience,  but  received  no  reply.  If  he  might  only 
"talk  with  the  king  about  matters  concerning  the  good  of 
Christianity  and  his  own  good,"  he  would  be  most  glad. 
Deeper  became  his  disappointment  as  he  found  "that  the 
king  had  forgotten  him,"  not  communicating  to  him  a  single 
word:  it  was  the  bitterest  of  disappointments.  Should  he 
be  sentenced  before  being  allowed  to  speak  a  word  with  him? 
If  that  was  to  the  king's  honor,  it  was  the  king's  lookout. 
As  for  the  council,  he  pleaded  that,  were  he  granted  a  hearing, 
the  king  might  at  least  be  present  and  occupy  a  seat  where 


i88  JOHN  HUSS 

he  would  be  able  to  hear  and  understand  what  Huss  had  to 
say.  This  was  his  last  lingering  hope  and  this  was  granted; 
but  in  the  sovereign  the  prisoner  found  a  poor  protector. 

He  also  begged  John  of  Chlum  to  intercede  with  the  king 
that  he  might  be  released  from  prison  and  have  opportunity 
freely  to  take  counsel  with  his  friends.  He  hoped  on  that 
he  might  be  allowed  to  preach  before  the  council.  With 
this  in  view,  he  had  prepared  three  sermons  before  leaving 
Prague;  but  day  after  day  and  week  after  week  passed,  and 
no  citation  came  to  appear  before  it.  He  had  been  told  he 
could  not  get  a  hearing  except  by  the  payment  of  two  thou- 
sand ducats.^  It  was  a  common  charge,  as  has  been  intimated, 
that  Huss  was  provided  with  an  abundance  of  money.  In 
one  of  the  examinations  held  in  the  Dominican  convent,  an 
archbishop  remarked  that  he  had  seventy  thousand  florins, 
and  Michael  de  Causis  insolently  put  the  question  to  him, 
how  much  the  barons  in  Bohemia  held  in  keeping  for  him? 
Huss's  expenses  were,  according  to  his  own  statement,  high. 
At  least  a  part  of  the  money  with  which  he  met  his  expenses 
were  loans  from  poor  as  well  as  rich,  money  it  was  one  of  his 
dying  concerns  to  have  refunded.^ 

In  March,  Huss  was  again  low,  racked  with  the  stone — 
a  new  experience — and  with  fever  and  vomiting.  The  lies 
circulated  against  him  were  many.  He  speaks  of  a  bag  of 
Hes  let  loose  to  hurt  him  and  his  cause.  He  was  disturbed 
at  the  relentless  hostihty  of  Palecz  and  Michael,  and  the 
constant  watch  had  over  him  by  spies  employed  by  Michael. 
Palecz,  whom  Huss  now  called  the  ringleader  among  his 
enemies — omnium  ductor — went  to  the  extent  of  proposing 
that  all  Huss's  Bohemian  adherents  be  cited  before  the  com- 
mission and  forced  to  abjure  his  alleged  errors.^  Conversa- 
tions passed  between  the  old  friends  and  colleagues  behind 
the  prison  walls. 

1  Doc,  88-91.    The  three  sermons,  Mon.,  55-71. 

*  Doc,  92,  99,  loi,  121.  '  Doc,  88,  90. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  189 

After  all,  Huss  was  an  unprotected  heretic,  and  heresy 
was  the  crime  of  crimes,  the  offense  above  all  others  in  this 
world  to  be  abhorred.  The  only  refuge  left  was  God,  and 
to  him  Huss  turned  with  all  the  tender  piety  of  which  he 
was  capable.  As  God  had  dehvered  Jonah  from  the  whale's 
belly  and  Daniel  from  the  lions'  den,  and  the  three  young 
men  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace  and  Susanna  from  her 
false  accusers,  so,  he  wrote,  He  was  able  to  deliver  him  pro- 
vided such  deliverance  would  be  for  His  glory.  In  His  mercy, 
He  could  release  the  Goose  though  locked  up  in  vilest  prison.^ 
With  litanies  and  prayers  he  helped  to  fill  out  sleepless  nights 
and,  in  suffering  he  kept  the  passion  of  the  Lord  constantly 
before  his  eyes.  He  looked  forward  with  regret  that  he  would 
not  have  the  privilege  of  taking  the  communion  at  Easter. 
He  called  upon  his  friends  in  Bohemia  to  partake  of  it  worthily. 
Consolation  was  afforded  him  by  a  visit  paid  him  by  Pra- 
chaticz  in  March.  In  the  presence  of  this  true  friend  and 
special  benefactor,  as  he  called  him,  he  broke  down  in  tears. 
At  the  instance  of  Michael  de  Causis,  Prachaticz  was  after- 
ward seized,  but  again  released  upon  signing  a  profession 
of  faith  and  by  Sigismund's  interference. 

In  Huss's  opinion  it  was  not  safe  for  a  Bohemian  to  venture 
near  the  council,  and  he  warned  his  friends,  especially  Jesenicz 
and  Jerome  of  Prague,  under  no  circumstances  to  venture 
to  come  to  Constance.  On  the  4th  of  April,  Jerome  actually 
dared  to  enter  the  city,  and  affixed  a  notice  on  the  city  gates 
affirming  Huss's  orthodoxy.  Again,  in  a  few  days,  he  re- 
turned and,  in  an  announcement  written  in  three  languages, 
posted  upon  the  doors  of  the  cathedral  and  the  Kauffhaus, 
he  called  upon  the  king  to  give  him  a  letter  of  safe-conduct 
that  he  might  appear  before  the  council  with  safety  and 
defend  Huss.  He  then  retired.  On  the  17th  of  April  the 
council  promised  to  protect  him  against  violence,  but,  doubt- 
ing its  word,  Jerome  attempted  to  flee  to  Bohemia.     Recog- 

'  Doc,  96,  99. 


I90  JOHN  HUSS 

nized  and  seized,  he  was  sent  to  Constance.  He  did  not  see 
Huss.  On  hearing  of  his  imprisonment,  Huss  expressed  the 
opinion  that  Jerome  would  suffer  death  as  well  as  himself. 
Jerome  was  at  once  taken  to  the  Franciscan  convent  and,  after 
an  examination  instituted  by  the  council,  was  transferred  to  a 
dungeon  in  the  cemetery  of  St.  Paul's,  chained  hand  and  foot. 
A  sickness  followed  from  which  he  recovered. 


CHAPTER  IX 
BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE 

Rediit  Constantiam  .  .  .  tradilus  vinctus  monasterio  Francisca- 
norum  .  .  .  donee  die  6.  Jiilii  carcerem  non  constantiam,  vitam  non 
fidem  linquerei. — Van  der  Hardt,  4  :  306. 

He  returned  to  Constance,  and  was  delivered  chained  to  the  con- 
vent of  the  Franciscans  till,  on  July  6,  he  gave  up  his  prison  but 
not  his  constancy,  his  life  but  not  his  faith. 

One  of  the  important  major  events  of  the  council  tem- 
porarily checked  the  proceedings  against  Huss  and  led  to 
his  transfer  to  the  prison  of  Gottlieben.  This  was  the  trial 
and  flight  of  John  XXIII.  The  question  of  the  disposition 
to  be  made  of  the  Pisan  pontiff  had  become  a  pressing  matter 
soon  after  Sigismund's  arrival  in  Constance.  From  the  day 
the  council  opened,  John  occupied  uncertain  ground.  When 
he  left  Florence  to  go  to  Constance,  he  was  wanting  to  go  to 
Rome,  made  free  by  Ladislaus's  death,  but  was  prevented  by 
his  cardinals.  The  charge  was  made  that  the  death  of  his 
predecessor,  Alexander  V,  was  due  to  poison  which  he  ad- 
ministered. He  was  an  able  but  an  unscrupulous  man. 
Beginning  his  life  as  a  corsair,  he  became  addicted  to  every 
crime.  With  the  popes  of  the  pornocracy,  904-931,  and 
Alexander  VI,  he  takes  the  palm  for  combining  with  his 
papal  functions  the  basest  iniquity  known  to  human  nature. 
At  his  trial  before  the  council  seventy  charges  were  listed 
against  him,  fourteen  of  which  were  suppressed  at  the  public 
reading.  He  had  sold  the  same  sacred  offices  over  and  over 
again,  sold  them  to  children,  disposed  of  the  head  of  John 
the  Baptist  for  fifty  thousand  ducats,  made  merchandise  of 
spurious  bulls,  committed  adultery  with  his  brother's  wife  and 


192  JOHN  HUSS 

violated  nuns  and  other  virgins,  and  was  guilty  of  sodomy. 
It  was  also  charged  that  he  had  called  the  future  life  in  ques- 
tion, 
r  Gradually  the  opinion  gained  ground  that,  in  order  to  bring 

I  about  the  reunion  of  the  church,  it  was  not  only  necessary 
to  set  aside  Gregory  XII  and  Benedict,  but  also  to  get  rid 
)  of  John,  whose  signature  had  convened  the  council.  A  tract, 
■^  written  by  an  Itahan  and  freely  circulated  in  Constance, 
teemed  with  charges,  making  John  out  a  monster.  Sigismund 
could  not  resist  the  storm  and,  to  avoid  a  worse  fate,  John 
agreed  to  resign.  The  formal  announcement  of  his  decision 
was  made  on  March  2,  1415,  the  condition  being  that  both 
his  pretended  rivals  of  the  Roman  and  Avignon  lines  be 
gotten  out  of  the  way.  His  proposal  was  made  to  give  peace 
to  the  church.^  During  the  announcement,  John  remained 
in  a  kneehng  posture  at  the  altar,  apparently  in  deep  de- 
votion, and  Sigismund,  overjoyed  at  the  rare  spectacle  of 
self-renunciation,  removed  his  crown  and  bent  low,  kissing 
the  pope's  feet.  Five  days  later,  John  confirmed  his  an- 
nouncement in  a  bull  which  ran:  "I,  John,  Pope  XXIII,  for 
the  peace  of  Christendom,  profess,  pronounce,  agree,  swear 
and  vow  to  God  and  the  church  and  to  the  sacred  council, 
of  my  own  will  and  freely  to  resign  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
peace  to  Christ's  church  by  the  way  of  my  unconditional 
cession  .  .  .  when  and  provided  Peter  de  Luna,  styled  Bene- 
dict XIII,  and  Angelo  Correr,  styled  Gregory  XII,  and  their 
obediences,  either  in  person  or  by  their  representatives,  re- 
nounce the  papal  office  to  which  they  falsely  lay  claim." 

Twice  before  in  the  history  of  the  church  had  popes  ab- 
dicated, once  at  the  synod  of  Sutri,  1046,  and  again  in  1294, 
when  Coelestin  V,  the  hermit  of  Murrhone,  after  a  reign  of  less 
than  six  months,  laid  down  his  office,  giving  as  the  reasons  his 

'  See  Schaff,  Church  Hist.,  with  the  authorities,  vol.  V,  i  :  154.  Richental 
is  particularly  full  in  the  details  of  the  happenings  in  Constance  at  the  time 
of  John's  flight. 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE    193 

own  bodily  weakness  and  the  wickedness  of  men.  John's  self- 
humiHation,  though  he  had  only  made  conditional  announce- 
ment of  his  resignation,  was  in  strong  contrast  to  his  stately 
entry  into  the  city  less  than  six  months  before.  The  city  of 
Constance  went  wild  in  rejoicing  over  the  papal  announce- 
ment, and  the  great  churchmen,  d'Ailly  and  Gerson,  as  well 
as  vigorous  pamphleteers  like  Nieheim,  were  exultant  over 
the  approaching  fruition  of  victory  in  the  reunification  of 
Christendom  under  a  single  pontiff.  John,  however,  was  a 
character  whose  bond  was  not  to  be  relied  upon  for  its  face 
value.  Rumors  w-ent  from  mouth  to  mouth  that  he  intended 
to  break  up  the  council  and,  if  necessary,  leave  Constance  in 
order  to  accomplish  that  result.  He  complained  to  Sigismund 
that  the  air  of  the  city  did  not  agree  with  him.  The  king  asked 
him  not  to  leave  secretly,  and  John  gave  his  promise  not  to 
leave  until  the  council  was  dissolved.  But  Sigismund  was 
not  fully  satisfied  and,  to  be  on  the  safe  side,  ordered  the 
gates  carefully  guarded  and  the  lake  watched.  So  little 
trust  was  put  in  the  pontiff's  oath  that  Hallum  of  Sahsbury 
is  said  to  have  asserted  that  he  deserved  to  be  burned. 

Taking  advantage  of  the  festivities  connected  with  a  tour- 
nament, which  drew  the  throng,  the  wily  pope  set  at  naught 
the  police  regulations  and  escaped  in  disguise  to  Schaffhausen, 
which  belonged  to  Ferdinand,  duke  of  Austria.  John  had 
taken  the  duke  into  his  service  by  appointing  him  gonfalonier 
of  the  church  with  a  salary  at  the  rate  of  six  thousand 
ducats  a  year  while  engaged  in  this  service.  Well  out  of 
Constance,  John  wrote  back  that  his  freedom  of  action  had 
been  restricted  by  the  king  and  complained  that  the  practice 
of  voting  by  nations,  which  the  council  had  decided  upon, 
was  unfair.  As  an  example,  he  gave  England,  which,  with  a 
few  prelates,  had  the  same  vote  as  Italy  and  France,  with 
several  hundred  prelates.  In  the  council  of  Nice  and  other 
early  councils  the  voting  was  done  by  the  bishops.  The 
council  of  Constance  took  a  radical  departure  when  it  de- 


194  JOHN  HUSS 

termined  that  the  vote  should  be  by  nations.  There  were 
four  nations,  the  EngHsh,  German,  Italian,  and  the  French, 
to  which  the  Spanish  was  later  added.  The  representatives 
of  these  nations  met  in  separate  assemblies  and  discussed 
the  questions  before  the  council,  and  then  recorded  their 
vote  for  use  in  the  cathedral. 

When  the  news  of  the  pope's  flight  became  known,  a 
panic  swept  through  Constance.  Hucksters  packed  up  their 
goods  or  bolted  their  booths.  It  was  like  the  breaking  up 
of  a  fair.  Only  the  prompt  action  of  Sigismund  prevented 
the  members  of  the  council  from  hurriedly  breaking  away. 
The  king  rode  through  the  streets,  accompanied  by  Lewis 
of  Bavaria,  seeking  to  allay  the  excitement  and  with  his 
own  voice  pledging  security  and  order. 

The  noise  raised  by  John's  flight,  the  prison  walls  of  the 
Blackfriars  could  not  deaden.  Huss's  letters  refer  to  the  tre- 
mendous excitement  and  the  confusion  in  which  the  council 
was  involved,  the  low  stock  of  provisions  in  Constance, 
and  to  the  withdrawal  of  the  ten  florins  set  apart  by  John 
for  his  own  weekly  support.  "I  have  nothing  to  eat,"  he 
wrote,  ''and  I  don't  know  what  is  going  to  happen  to  me 
in  prison."  All  his  guards,  who  were  John's  creatures,  were 
fleeing.  Huss  was  even  afraid  that  the  master  of  the  papal 
household  might  carry  him  off  by  night. 

Their  master  fled,  the  jailers  turned  the  prison  keys  over 
to  the  king.  Following  the  advice  of  members  of  the  council, 
he  committed  the  prisoner  to  the  charge  of  the  bishop  of 
Constance.  To  Mladenowicz  it  seemed  that  this  was  a  fitting 
opportunity  for  Sigismund  to  have  shown  honorable  respect 
to  his  safe-conduct  and  given  Huss  freedom.  On  the  night 
of  March  24,  the  bishop  of  Constance  conveyed  him,  bound 
in  chains  and  protected  by  a  strong  body-guard,  by  boat  to 
his  castle,  Gottlieben  on  the  Rhine,  outside  the  walls  of  the 
city.  This  charmingly  situated  castle,  now  owned  by  Baron 
Fabrice,  is  less  than  two  miles  from  the  cathedral  of  Con- 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     195 

stance  and  a  mile  from  the  place  where  Huss  died.  The 
grounds  are  beautified  with  flowers  and  the  walls  overgrown 
with  vines.  Huss's  Tower,  which  was  pointed  out  to  me  by 
the  baron,  is  25  feet  square,  its  walls  5  feet  thick,  and  the  ascent 
within  is  made  by  124  steps  of  stone  or  wood.  The  top  story 
was  Huss's  place  of  confinement.  A  beautiful  view  is  had 
through  the  narrow  casement  over  the  lake  and  to  the  moun- 
tains beyond.  A  tablet  in  Czech  and  German  gives  the  date 
of  Huss's  confinement. 

Here  in  this  high  and  airy  tower — turri  aerosa — as  he 
called  it,  Huss  had  freedom  to  walk  about  during  the  day, 
his  feet  fettered;  and  at  night  his  hands  were  chained  with 
iron  manacles  fastened  to  the  wall  near  his  bed.  So  rigorous 
was  the  imprisonment  at  GottHeben,  which  lasted  more 
than  two  months,  March  24  to  June  5,  that  not  a  single 
letter  written  by  the  prisoner's  hand  is  preserved.  There 
was  no  jailer  like  Robert  to  mediate  between  him  and  the 
outside  world.  His  case  was  put,  April  6,  into  the  hands 
of  a  new  commission,  with  d'Ailly  at  its  head,  with  full  power 
to  examine  into  WycHf's  teachings  and  his  own.^  On  the 
17th  a  change  was  again  made,  d'Ailly  withdrew,  and  four 
commissioners  were  appointed,  one  from  each  of  the  four 
nations.  While  the  inquisition  in  committee  was  being 
conducted,  the  case  was  also  brought  before  the  council  as  a 
whole  through  protests  against  Huss's  treatment  emanating 
from  Bohemians  and  Poles  sojourning  in  Constance  and 
nobles  in  the  home  country. 

The  first  of  these,  signed  by  a  number  of  Bohemian  and 
Polish  noblemen  at  the  time  in  Constance,  was  presented 
May  13  to  the  four  nations  assembled  in  the  refectory 
of  the  Franciscan  convent.  The  document  reasserted  that 
Huss  had  come  to  Constance,  under  promise  of  safe-conduct 
from  the  king,  to  give  public  statement  of  his  tenets.  He 
had  been  incarcerated  without  a  hearing  and  become  so 
^  Hardt,  4  :  100.     Mansi,  27  :  592. 


196  JOHN  HUSS 

reduced  in  prison  that  he  was  in  danger  of  losing  his  reason. 
And  this  had  occurred  while  other  persons,  accused  of  heresy 
at  Pisa,  were  allowed  their  personal  liberty.  The  kingdom  of 
Bohemia  was  suffering  under  the  unjust  aspersion  of  heresy. 
The  document  petitioned  that  Huss  be  at  once  set  at  liberty. 
His  health  made  delay  dangerous.  It  then  went  on  to  deny 
the  charge  that  the  cup  was  being  freely  distributed  in  Bo- 
hemia, In  the  discussion  which  followed,  the  bishop  of  Leito- 
mysl  made  an  address  denying  the  accuracy  of  the  state- 
ments. Very  many  towns  and  cities  in  Bohemia,  he  said, 
were  infected  with  Wyclifism.  The  attempts  to  root  it  out 
had  been  in  vain.  Wyclifism  was  rank  heresy.  The  Wy- 
clifists  held  that  the  use  of  the  cup  by  the  laity  was  essential 
to  salvation.  A  woman  of  Prague  of  the  Wyclifist  sect,^  so 
he  alleged,  had  ruthlessly  taken  the  host  from  the  hands  of  a 
priest  and  eaten  it,  and  even  Bohemian  shoemakers  were 
daring  to  distribute  the  bread  and  wine  and  to  turn  con- 
fessors. These  sectarists  pronounced  priests  guilty  of  sacrilege 
who  refused  to  distribute  the  wine.  As  he  had  done  before, 
so  again  the  bishop  begged  the  Fathers  to  put  down  the  ex- 
cesses in  Bohemia. 

Two  days  later.  May  i6,  the  bishop  of  Carcassonne 
made  a  reply  to  the  petition  of  the  nobles,  the  entire  German 
nation,  as  well  as  delegates  from  the  other  three  nations,  and 
also  a  number  of  the  signers  of  the  petition  being  present. 
The  bishop  declared  that  the  Bohemian  and  Polish  nobles 
were  in  error  when  they  said  that  Huss  had  come  to  Constance 
under  the  imperial  protection.  The  salvus  conductus  had 
not  been  given  until  fifteen  days  after  Huss's  arrival.  As 
for  the  second  point,  that  Huss  had  been  arrested  and  im- 
prisoned without  a  hearing,  the  fact  was  that  he  had  been 
cited  to  Rome  and  had  neglected  to  appear  and  that,  in  view 
of  his  prolonged  excommunication,  he  was  no  longer  a  simple 

^  Doc,  259.    This  woman  seems  to  have  preached  in  the  church  in  1416. 
Palacky,  Gesch.,  note,  p.  334. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     197 

heretic  but  a  heresiarch,  the  inventor  and  sower  of  new 
errors.  Moreover,  as  for  his  having  publicly  preached  in 
Constance,  this  was  a  fact,  as  his  opponents  declared,  a  fact 
which  John  of  Chlum's  pledged  word  had  not  proved  untrue. 

In  making  their  reply,  the  nobles  declared  the  suggestion 
that  the  passport  had  not  been  promised  before  Huss's  arrival 
in  Constance  gave  the  lie  to  the  imperial  chancery.  On  the 
day  of  his  arrest,  in  answer  to  a  question  put  by  John  XXIII, 
he  had  stated  that,  as  they  all  knew,  he  had  such  a  passport 
from  the  king,  and  on  the  succeeding  days  it  was  shown  to 
many  lords,  bishops,  and  other  persons  in  Constance.  The 
nobles  continued  that  Huss  had  been  ready  to  go  to  Rome 
and  had  sent  procurators  to  the  holy  city  and  that,  as  for  the 
excommunication,  he  had  appealed  from  it  to  Christ  and  the 
council,  and  had  come  to  Constance  for  the  very  purpose  of 
making  a  public  showing  of  his  faith.  To  this  John  of  Chlum 
added  that,  as  for  the  charge  that  Huss  had  publicly  preached 
in  Constance,  not  only  had  he  not  preached,  but  he  had  not 
even  set  his  foot  across  the  threshold  of  the  house  where  he 
lodged  from  the  time  he  entered  it  to  the  day  he  was  arrested. 
In  reference  to  the  Wyclifite  practices  prevalent  in  Bohemia, 
as  charged  by  the  bishop  of  Leitomysl,  the  Bohemians  and 
Poles  flatly  denied  the  charge.  It  was  a  question,  they  said, 
of  observation  and  of  veracity  as  between  them  and  the  Iron 
Bishop.  In  this  meeting  the  deposition  of  the  bishop  of 
Nazareth — Bishop-sup- with- the-devil — attesting  Huss's  or- 
thodoxy was  read. 

A  petition  signed  at  Briinn  by  nine  high  Moravian  noble- 
men and  other  noblemen,  dated  May  8,  1415,  was  read  May 
31  in  the  council.  It  was  addressed  to  Sigismund  and  in- 
terceded that  Huss  might  not  be  left  in  a  corner  but  have 
an  open  hearing,  called  Huss  a  good  man  and  a  faithful  and 
honest  preacher  and  minister  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The 
nobles  reminded  the  king  of  his  written  public  promise  which 
he  had  given  to  Huss,  "although  there  was  no  need  of  a 


igS  JOHN  HUSS 

passport  for  a  good  and  pious  man."  In  defiance  of  the  law, 
right  and  this  public  promise,  Huss  had  been  thrown  into 
a  close  prison.  Now,  they  heard,  he  had  been  taken  into 
custody  by  the  bishop  of  Constance  and  subjected  to  even 
more  rigorous  imprisonment,  and  that  the  bishop  had  cruelly 
and  wrongfully  put  him  in  chains.  In  begging  for  his  release, 
they  pledged  their  word,  "a  word  they  would  not  break  for 
anything  in  the  world,"  that  Huss  would  remain  in  Constance 
until  he  had  a  public  hearing. 

To  this  second  appeal  the  patriarch  of  Antioch  in  the  name 
of  the  council  gave  reply  that,  if  the  assertion  of  Huss's  in- 
nocence were  found  to  be  well  made  and  the  excerpts  from 
his  book  extracted  by  doctors  misrepresented  him,  these 
things  would  appear  in  a  pubHc  hearing,  which  he  thereupon 
set  for  June  5.  As  for  the  word  of  the  nobles,  he  declared 
that  not  the  word  of  a  thousand  men  should  be  taken  as  a 
surety  for  a  man  who  was  in  nowise  to  be  believed.  Certainly 
such  a  flagrant  heretic  was  not  to  be  placed  in  the  hands  of 
any  persons  giving  a  guarantee,  whoever  they  might  be.^ 

The  most  weighty  of  these  appeals,  dated  May  12,  was 
signed  by  two  hundred  and  fifty  Bohemian  and  Moravian 
nobles  and  read  in  the  council,  June  12.  It  was  likewise 
addressed  to  Sigismund.  The  signers  called  the  king's  atten- 
tion to  the  promise  which  John  had  given  the  year  before, 
that  all,  even  heretics,  going  to  Constance  should  have  safety 
there  and  back.  Huss  they  pronounced  the  most  honest  of 
men  and  a  faithful  preacher  of  the  divine  Word.  He  had 
gone  to  Constance  to  rid  Bohemia  of  the  ill  fame  of  heresy. 
Witnesses,  more  in  number  than  his  enemies  and  more  trust- 
worthy than  they,  had  borne  testimony  that  he  had  never 
preached  anything  unsound  or  heretical,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
only  the  truth  and  the  divine  law  as  set  forth  in  the  sacred 
Scriptures  and  explained  by  the  holy  Fathers.  In  spite  of 
law  and  the  king's  public  promise,  Huss  had  been  cast  into 

*  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  271.    The  Briinn  appeal,  Doc,  547  sq. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     199 

prison.  All  Bohemia  was  burdened  with  the  disgrace  and 
shame  of  having  an  innocent  man  treated  like  a  criminal. 
Sigismund,  they  alleged,  was  able  easily  to  secure  obedience 
to  his  will  and  have  Huss  released  so  that  he  might  return 
*'to  us  in  Bohemia"  with  the  same  safety  with  which  he  had 
gone  to  Constance.  The  king's  honor  as  well  as  Bohemia's 
peace  and  honor  were  bound  up  in  securing  this  result. 

In  another  document,  signed  by  other  Bohemian  nobles 
and  dated  May  12,  1415,^  an  urgent  call  was  made  to  the 
Bohemian  and  Moravian  nobles  at  Constance  to  be  insistent 
in  interceding  with  the  king  not  to  permit  the  iniquity  being 
perpetrated  upon  Huss  to  continue.  As  they  heard,  so  they 
said,  Huss  "had  been  seized  by  royal  authority  and  in  the 
king's  city"  in  spite  of  his  having  been  given  pubHc  promise 
of  security,  they  called  upon  the  king  to  release  him  and 
to  accord  him  the  same  full  liberty  to  return  to  Bohemia 
he  had  exercised  in  going  to  Constance. 

In  these  appeals,  which  the  signers  affirmed  represented 
the  views  of  the  people  at  large,  the  high  personal  character 
of  Huss  is  vouched  for,  as  also  his  fidelity  in  preaching  the 
Gospel.  The  arrest  and  imprisonment  are  treated  as  criminal 
injustice  and  in  violation  of  solemn  pledges.  The  ignominy 
put  upon  Huss  is  regarded  as  an  insult  to  Bohemia.  With 
unanimity,  they  put  the  same  interpretation  upon  the  mean- 
ing and  intent  of  Sigismund's  passport — salvus  conductiis. 

It  would  have  been  quite  according  to  the  inhumane 
usages  of  that  age — usages  also  in  vogue  in  later  centuries — ■ 
if,  in  spite  of  the  high  character  of  many  of  the  churchmen 
met  at  Constance,  Huss  had  been  kept  in  prison,  completely 
shut  off  from  the  world,  until  his  death.  Others,  whose  views 
were  called  in  question  though  their  piety  was  not  denied, 
and  some  of  whose  names  we  know,  suft'ered  this  awful  fate; 
as,  for  example,  Carranza,  archbishop  of  Toledo,  and  Michael 
de  Molinos,  author  of  The  Spiritual  Guide,  both  in  Rome. 

1  Doc,  554. 


200  JOHN  HUSS 

P  This  fate  Huss  feared  for  himself,  and  it  is  quite  possible 
that  he  owed  his  deliverance  to  these  appeals  by  Bohemia 
and  Moravia.    The  protest  of  the  signers,  so  many  in  number 

I       and  of  such  high  standing,  it  would  have  been  audacity 

■       indeed  in  the  council  to  have  ignored. 

The  distribution  of  the  cup  to  the  laity  in  the  city  of 
Prague,  to  which  reference  is  made  in  one  of  these  appeals, 
was  rendering,  if  possible,  Huss's  case  more  difficult  of  satis- 
factory explanation.  This  practice  introduced  a  new  element 
of  division.  Huss  had  received  news  of  it  in  prison.  To  us, 
extraordinary  as  it  may  seem,  the  withholding  of  the  cup 
from  laymen  had  become  a  general  custom  in  the  West. 
The  original  reason  for  it  may  have  been  either  an  effort  to 
emphasize  the  distinction  of  the  priesthood  and  the  laity 
or  to  prevent  profanation  of  the  sacred  blood  by  its  being 
spilled  or  eructated  by  the  receiver.  The  custom  was  justified 
by  the  shrewdest  sophistry  of  which  the  mediaeval  theologians 
were  capable,  from  Alexander  of  Hales,  d.  1245,  down.  Once 
fixed  by  ecclesiastical  considerations,  the  attempt  was  made 
to  justify  it  by  Scriptural  authority.  The  best  that  could 
be  done  from  this  standpoint  was  done  by  Thomas  Aquinas, 
who  recalled  that  Christ  distributed  bread  to  the  five  thousand 
but  not  drink.  However,  if  the  reference  were  to  be  taken 
too  seriously,  it  might  have  been  argued  that  fish  would  have 
been  a  proper,  if  not  a  necessary,  substitute  for  the  wine. 

But  the  practice  was  based  upon  other  grounds.  Anselm, 
a  century  or  two  before  Aquinas,  had  insisted  that  the  whole 
Christ  was  in  the  transmuted  wine  and  the  whole  Christ 
in  the  transubstantiated  bread;  but  Anselm  did  not  resort 
to  speculation  to  justify  the  withdrawal  of  the  cup.  Other- 
wise Alexander  Hales,  who  insisted  that  it  should  be  withheld 
for  the  purpose  of  teaching  the  laity  the  doctrine  that  the 
whole  Christ  is  in  each  of  the  elements,  that  laymen  might 
know  that  in  partaking  of  the  bread  alone  they  are  partaking 
of  Christ's  full  body.    It  remained  for  the  council  of  Constance 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  201 

to  threaten  with  excommunication  all  who  distributed  the 
wine  to  the  laity.  The  enhghtened  churchman,  Gerson,  who 
voted  for  this  enactment,  referred  to  Acts  2  :  42,  46,  as 
showing  that  the  breaking  of  bread  was  alone  practised 
soon  after  the  inception  of  the  church,  and  urged  the  danger 
of  profanation  to  the  wine  by  spilling  it  or  by  its  coming 
in  contact  with  the  beards  of  laymen.  There  was  likewise, 
he  argued,  the  danger  of  its  being  frozen  or  turning  to  vinegar, 
and  also  the  danger,  if  both  elements  were  administered, 
of  seeming  to  show  that  at  the  communion  priest  and  layman 
are  on  an  equality.  Moreover,  Christ  had  commanded  only 
the  Apostles  to  partake  of  both  elements.  The  last  con- 
sideration was  based  upon  the  words:  "Drink  ye  all  of  it." 
However,  we  may  well  reply,  the  words  of  institution  in  the 
case  of  the  bread  might  with  equal  plausibility  be  appHed 
to  the  Apostles  alone  and  their  successors,  the  priests,  and 
in  this  way  the  layman  be  deprived  of  both  of  the  elements 
in  the  Lord's  Supper.^ 

Jacobellus  of  Mies,  the  most  prominent  theological  master 
left  in  Prague,  began  to  practise  the  double  communion  soon 
after  the  migration  of  the  doctors  to  the  council  and  seems 
to  have  had  the  support  of  many  of  Huss's  followers.  The 
Scriptures  being  taken  as  authority,  many  church  rites  and 
customs  consecrated  by  the  usage  of  years  are  found  to  be  of 
human  authority  and  vanish  away  in  its  plain  light  as  of  no 
necessary  obhgation.  This  was  the  case  with  the  innovators 
in  Prague  as  also  with  Huss  and  Wyclif.  In  several  of  the 
Prague  churches  both  elements  were  distributed.  The  arch- 
bishop's excommunication  pronounced  upon  Jacobellus  seems 
to  have  made  little  impression. 

When  the  news  of  the  innovation  first  came  to  Huss's 
ears  he  was  incHned  to  resent  the  change,  but  he  speedily 

*  Schwab,  J .  Gerson,  pp.  604  sqq.  For  strange  customs  in  connection  with 
the  distribution  of  the  cup,  see  Schaff,  Ch.  Hist.,  vol.  V,  i  :  726  sq.;  V,  2  : 
211  sq. 


202  JOHN  HUSS 

assumed  a  different  attitude  and  wrote  a  tract  in  its  favor. 
His  object  in  so  doing  was  to  unite  his  followers  and  his  at- 
titude had  the  desired  result.  He  leaned  upon  the  plain 
teaching  of  Scripture,  making  the  use  of  the  cup  as  essential 
as  the  use  of  the  bread.  ^Eneas  Sylvius  joined  in  spreading 
the  charge  against  Jacobellus  that  he  made  the  partaking 
of  the  wine  necessary  to  salvation.  The  use  of  the  cup  by 
the  laity  became  the  battle-ground  between  Hussitism  and 
the  Catholic  authorities  after  Huss's  death.  The  Roman 
practice  forbidding  it  called  forth  the  protests  of  Luther 
and  the  other  Reformers.  If  there  were  any  members  of  the 
council  who  had  doubt  about  Huss's  heresy,  the  innovation 
confirmed  them  in  the  conviction  that  he  was  a  dangerous 
character,  a  corrupt  branch  to  be  cut  off  lest  it  infect  the  vine 
of  the  church. 

The  council's  decree  formally  condemning  Wyclif  and  his 
teachings  also  definitely  placed  that  tribunal  in  closer  array 
against  the  prisoner.  On  May  4,  two  hundred  and  sixty  errors, 
ascribed  to  the  English  divine,  were  proscribed,  and  his  bones 
ordered  exhumed  from  their  resting-place,  provided  they  could 
be  distinguished  from  the  bones  of  the  faithful  sleepers,  and 
ordered  cast  at  a  distance  from  the  place  of  ecclesiastical 
sepulture.  The  decree  was  not  carried  out  until  1429,  when 
Martin  V  issued  a  special  brief  enjoining  its  execution.  "The 
holy  synod,"  so  ran  the  decree,  "declares  the  said  John  Wyclif 
to  have  been  a  notorious  heretic,  excommunicates  him,  and 
condemns  his  memory  as  of  one  who  died  an  obstinate 
heretic." 

While  Huss  was  still  at  Gottlieben,  John  XXHI  was 
checked  in  his  flight,  arrested  and  brought  back  to  Constance 
and  placed  as  a  prisoner  in  the  same  castle.  Whether,  dur- 
ing his  two  days'  confinement  in  Gottlieben,  the  two  men 
saw  one  another  across  the  courtyard  is  not  known.  As 
strangely  disparate  were  the  ends  of  this  pope  and  Huss  as 
were  their  careers.     The  one  guilty,  as  the  council  charged, 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     203 

of  all  turpitude  and  deposed  was,  after  a  period  of  confine- 
ment at  Heidelberg,  released  and  made  cardinal  bishop  of 
Tusculum,  in  the  possession  of  which  dignity  he  died  six 
months  later,  1419.  A  splendid  tomb,  the  work  of  Donatello 
and  Michelozzo,  was  erected  to  his  memory  by  the  Florentines 
in  the  baptistry  of  their  city.  Huss,  against  whose  private 
character  and  devotion  to  duty,  as  he  saw  it,  no  charges  were 
made,  was  harried  and  burned  at  the  stake,  his  ashes  scattered 
on  the  Rhine  and  his  memory  declared  pestilential.  A  rude 
bowlder  marks  the  place  of  his  death.  But  while  John's 
name  is  only  a  memory  and  his  career  a  warning,  Huss  lives 
in  the  hearts  of  many  as  a  wholesome  and  uplifting  force., 

In  order  to  be  within  close  reach  of  the  Franciscan  friary, 
at  which  the  hearing  was  announced  for  June  5,  Huss,  as 
it  would  seem,  was  removed  on  the  morning  of  that  very 
day  to  a  tower  adjoining  it.  Our  knowledge  of  his  affairs, 
so  scant  during  the  period  of  his  imprisonment  at  Gottlieben, 
suddenly  becomes  full  and  satisfactory  with  his  removal  to 
his  new  prison,  which  lacked  some  of  the  rigors  of  his  previous 
confinement.  His  correspondence  begins  again  the  very  day 
of  his  arrival  at  the  Franciscan  convent.  In  his  first  letter 
he  speaks  of  his  food  as  once  more  plentiful  and  wholesome. 

The  public  hearing,  now  to  be  held,  was  an  unusual  con- 
cession made  to  Sigismund.  The  inquisitional  trials  were 
wont  to  be  held  in  utter  secrecy.  In  this  case  all  the  prelates 
and  other  members  of  the  council  were  present  at  the  hearing. ^ 
As  was  the  custom  with  the  inquisition  on  such  occasions,  the 
fiftieth  psalm  was  read,  one  verse  of  which  runs:  "Unto  the 
wicked  God  saith,  What  hast  thou  to  do  to  declare  my  stat- 
utes, and  that  thou  hast  taken  my  covenant  in  thy  mouth?" 
The  thirty  articles  which  the  commission  of  eight,  headed  by 
d'Ailly,  had  presented  to  Huss,  May  19,  as  being  proven 
against  him  were  then  read,  together  with  his  last  letter 
written  to  his  Bohemian  friends  as  he  was  about  to  start  on 

'  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  p.  274. 


204  JOHN  HUSS 

the  journey  to  Constance,  in  which  he  spoke  of  going  to  meet 
inveterate  foes  and  the  possibiHty  of  his  death.  It  was  evi- 
dent that  the  council's  purpose  was  to  sentence  Huss  forth- 
with, without  giving  him  a  chance  to  defend  himself.  One 
who  was  Hstening  and  had  seen  the  text  of  the  sentence  in- 
formed Peter  Mladenowicz  of  this  purpose.^  Running  to 
John  of  Chlum  and  Wenzel  of  Duba,  Mladenowicz  apprised 
them  of  what  was  about  to  be  done.  They  in  turn  hastened 
to  the  king  to  inform  him  and  handed  him  autographic  copies 
of  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church  and  his  tracts  against  Palecz 
and  Stanislaus  of  Znaim. 

Without  delay  the  king  despatched  Lewis,  count  palatine, 
and  Frederick,  burgrave  of  Niirnberg,  to  inform  the  council 
that  it  was  the  royal  will  that  no  condemnation  be  pro- 
nounced until  the  king  first  had  notice  of  it,  and  that  Huss 
should  be  given  a  patient  hearing.  The  messengers  then 
handed  the  Treatise  on  the  Church  and  those  against  Palecz 
and  Znaim  to  the  council,  with  the  understanding  that  they 
should  be  returned  without  erasures  or  the  introduction  of 
new  material.  Being  asked  whether  the  three  writings  were 
his,  Huss  declared  they  were  and  that  if  anything  was  taught 
in  them  which  was  erroneous  or  evil  he  was  ready  humbly 
to  recall  it.  As  the  thirty  articles  and  the  depositions  of  the 
witnesses  were  being  read  and  Huss  attempted  to  reply, 
members  of  the  council  strove  to  drown  his  voice  by  vociferous 
cries,  exclaiming:  "Be  done  with  your  sophistry  and  say  yes 
or  no."  Others  laughed  at  him,  and,  when  he  attempted  to 
adduce  authorities,  they  joined  in  asserting  that  they  were 
not  to  the  point.  Finding  his  efforts  unavailing,  Huss  then 
kept  silent,  so  that  members  cried  out:  "See,  thou  art 
silent.  It  is  plain  thou  givest  assent  to  the  errors."  Huss 
was  not  disappointed  in  finding  that  the  synod  was  not  in- 

1  For  important  details  we  are  dependent  upon  Mladenowicz,  Huss's  friend, 
alone,  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  he  gave  a  partisan  coloring  to  some  of  his 
statements. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE    205 

clined  to  prove  from  the  Fathers  and  the  Scriptures  that  the 
charges  made  against  him  were  well  taken  and  that  its  mind 
was  made  up  and  the  verdict  virtually  decided  upon. 

Writing  of  the  experiences  of  the  day,  he  recalled  the 
clamor  of  the  Jews  against  Jesus  before  the  crucifixion.  Among 
all  the  clergy  he  had  failed  to  discover  a  single  friend  except 
"the  father"  and  a  Polish  doctor.  Further,  he  felt  that  the 
councillors  had  not  come  to  the  main  point,  which  he  regarded 
as  embodied  in  the  teachings  in  his  small  treatises,  all  of 
which  they  would  insist  upon  his  retracting.  As  he  feared 
might  be  the  case,  the  council  was  not  ready  to  Hsten  to 
Augustine's  definition  of  the  church,  based  upon  the  decree 
of  predestination.  He  wrote  to  John  of  Chlum  that  he  was 
expecting  death,  and  he  would  rather  have  his  body  consumed 
in  the  flames  than  be  hidden  away  in  the  concealment  and 
darkness  of  a  dungeon  forever.  In  the  former  case,  Christen- 
dom would  at  least  know  what  his  position  really  was. 

In  adjourning,  the  assembly  left  with  Huss  the  responsi- 
bility of  confessing  all  the  articles  taken  from  his  books  as 
erroneous.  As  he  was  being  conducted  by  the  bishop  of 
Riga  from  the  refectory  to  his  prison,  he  noticed  his  friends, 
and,  giving  them  his  hand,  said:  "Have  no  fear  for  me." 
When  they  replied  they  had  no  fear,  he  said  again:  "I  know 
it  well,  I  know  it  well."  Ascending  the  stairway,  he  turned 
and  blessed  the  people  who  stood  by,  smiled  and  seemed  to 
be  in  good  spirits.^ 

The  second  hearing,  on  June  7,  was  delayed  until  ten 
o'clock  by  an  almost  total  eclipse  of  the  sun.  A  grim  aspect 
was  given  to  the  occasion  by  the  guard  of  city  soldiers  which 
surrounded  the  convent  building.  At  this  meeting  the  king 
was  present,  and  Huss  saw  him  for  the  first  time  in  Constance. 
The  proceedings  were  conducted  with  some  decorum,  as  the 
order  had  gone  forth  that  persons  shouting  were  to  be  ejected. 
The  vivid  description  given  by  Mladenowicz  is  corroborated 
'  Doc,  loi,  105,  276. 


2o6  JOHN  HUSS 

and  supplemented  by  Huss's  letters  written  at  the  close  of 
the  day. 

Two  articles  had  been  stricken  out  from  the  list  of  the 
charges  of  June  5, — a  gain  of  less  importance  than  Huss  fan- 
cied it  to  be.  Witnesses — doctors,  prelates,  parish  priests 
and  others — were  called  upon  to  bear  witness  to  the  accusa- 
tion that  since  1410  Huss  had  been  preaching  the  doctrines  of 
Wyclif  and  other  erroneous  doctrines  of  his  own  invention. 
The  XLV  Wyclifite  Articles  were  brought  in  evidence,  as 
also  Huss's  attitude  to  the  burning  of  Wyclif's  books,  and  the 
trouble  at  the  university  with  the  Germans.  A  charge  on 
which  great  stress  was  laid  was  the  remanence  of  the  material 
bread.  This  charge  Huss  denied,  caUing  God  and  his  con- 
science to  witness;  but  in  explanation  of  his  use  of  the  term 
panis,  bread,  he  said  that  he  had  used  it  against  the  arch- 
bishop's prohibition  but  in  conformity  with  John  6,  where  the 
Lord  spoke  of  himself  again  and  again  as  bread  and  the 
bread  of  angels.  However,  he  did  not  use  the  expression 
material  bread.  Here  a  question  was  interjected  concerning 
Universals  and  their  bearing  on  the  substance  of  consecrated 
bread.  This  was  intended  to  be  a  trap,  the  object  being  to 
show  that  if  Huss  were  a  Realist  he  could  not  believe  in  the 
transubstantiation  of  the  elements.  In  being  a  Realist,  Huss 
followed  Wyclif  and  deposed  that  he  accepted  Universals 
in  the  sense  used  by  St.  Anselm  and  others.^  By  the  order  of 
the  French  king.  Realism  had  been  pronounced  erroneous, 
and  all  other  views  except  Nominahsm  expatriated  from 
France. 

The  introduction  of  a  question,  philosophical  and  scholastic 
in  its  import,  did  not  appeal  to  all  the  members.  D'Ailly, 
who  was  a  Nominalist,  and  seemed  to  be  in  hot  temper,  had 
said  that  if  Huss  followed  Anselm,  then  after  the  consecra- 
tion of  the  elements  the  material  bread  remained.     Three 

^Tschackert,  Peter  d'Ailll,  p.   226  sq.     Mladenowicz,  Doc,  p.  277.     See 
Schwab,  Gerson,  p.  586  sq. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  207 

Englishmen  entered  into  the  discussion.  One  started  up  and 
sought  to  lay  bare  how,  on  the  Realistic  theory,  the  primal 
substance  must  remain  in  the  elements  after  consecration. 
To  this  Huss  rephed  that  such  puerile  argument  befitted 
schoolboys.  A  second  Englishman  standing  close  to  Huss 
started  to  prove  that  on  that  theory  after  the  consecration 
the  substantial  form  of  the  material  bread  remained  and 
also  the  substance  of  the  original  bread  was  not  annihilated. 
Huss  replied,  that  it  was  true  it  was  not  annihilated,  but  by 
an  exceptional  law — singular  iter — it  ceased  to  be  and  was 
transubstantiated- into  the  body  of  Christ.  An  Englishman 
then  rephed  that  Huss,  following  Wychf,  was  now  answering 
with  reservation,  but  that,  nevertheless,  he  held  that  the 
real  bread  remained.  To  this  Huss  retorted  that,  before 
God,  he  was  speaking  sincerely  and  from  the  heart,  and  that 
he  believed  the  consecrated  bread  was  the  real  body  which 
was  born  of  Mary,  suffered,  died  and  rose  again  and  sitteth 
at  the  right  hand  of  God.  This  was  substantially  the  word- 
ing of  the  definition  of  the  fourth  Lateran  council,  which 
defined  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation.  One  of  the  Enghsh- 
men  then  went  on  to  say  that  there  was  no  reason  for  intro- 
ducing into  the  hearing  an  irrelevant  question  which  meant 
nothing  for  an  act  which  was  an  act  of  faith;  Huss  was  right. 
At  this  point  a  familiar  figure  appeared,  the  Englishman 
Stokes,  whom  we  have  met  at  Prague,  and  who  deposed  that 
he  had  seen  in  the  Bohemian  capital  a  book,  ascribed  to  Huss, 
teaching  remanence.  To  this  Huss  rephed  that  it  was  not 
true.  On  others  adding  their  testimonies  that  Huss  had 
preached  this  doctrine,  the  Florentine  cardinal  Zabarella  ap- 
pealed to  the  law,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses 
a  thing  is  established.  To  this  Huss  made  answer  that  God 
and  his  conscience  knew  what  he  had  preached  and  had  in 
his  heart,  and  all  the  testimonies  of  his  adversaries  would 
do  him  no  injury.  Another  doctor  who  attempted  to  explain 
transubstantiation  got  confused  and   sat    down,   saying   of 


2o8  JOHN  HUSS 

Huss:  "It  is  all  heresy."  According  to  one  of  Huss's  letters, 
one  of  the  English  doctors  in  a  private  hearing  told  him  that 
WycUf  was  bent  upon  destroying  all  learning.  Going  over 
the  examination  in  his  prison,  Huss  expressed  the  opinion 
that  he  had  silenced  d'Ailly.  When  he  referred  to  his  con- 
science there  was  such  a  clamor  that  Huss  exclaimed:  ''I 
thought  that  there  would  be  more  reverence,  religion  and 
order  in  this  council."  So  great  was  the  disorder  that  the 
king  called  for  silence.  At  this  point  d'Ailly  and  Zabarella 
interjected  that  the  council  could  not  base  its  verdict 
upon  what  was  in  Huss's  conscience  but  only  upon  the 
express  statements  of  witnesses  and  Huss's  own  admissions 
— nos  non  possumus  secundum  tuam  conscientiam  judicare. 
Huss,  they  said,  had  expressed  himself  against  Palecz's  testi- 
mony, who  had  drawn  his  charges  from  Huss's  books,  and  also 
the  testimony  of  the  chancellor  of  Paris,  Gerson;  but  Gerson, 
d'Ailly  went  on  to  say,  ''was  certainly  a  great  authority, 
a  great  doctor,  if  any  could  be  found  in  Christendom."^ 
Huss  had  written  to  his  friends  that  he  wished  God  would 
give  him  time  to  write  of  the  lies  invented  by  the  rector  of 
the  Paris  university,  who  had  so  unfairly  charged  him  with 
heresy. 

Among  other  statements  ascribed  to  Huss  were  these:  That 
tithes  are  to  be  regarded  as  pure  alms  and  that  the  rich  on 
pain  of  eternal  damnation  are  imder  obligations  to  do  the 
six  works  of  mercy,  Matt.  25  :  44.  With  reference  to  these 
charges,  the  bishop  of  Salisbury  observed  that  "if  all 
are  obliged  to  do  the  six  works  of  mercy,  then  it  follows 
that  the  poor  who  can  give  nothing  will  be  damned."  But 
Huss  rephed  that  he  had  limited  his  statement  to  a  particular 
class. 

Another  charge  was  that  he  had  called  upon  his  adherents 
to  resist  his  adversaries  by  resort  to  the  material  sword,  ap- 
pealing for  this  counsel  to  Moses'  example.     To  this  he  replied 

^  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  p.  278. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  209 

that  the  words  had  been  falsely  ascribed  to  him.  In  preaching 
about  the  helmet  of  salvation  and  the  sword  of  the  Spirit, 
he  had  exhorted  that  all  should  gird  themselves  with  the 
sword  and  defend  the  truth  of  the  Gospel,  but,  in  order  that 
his  enemies  might  not  have  wherewith  to  entrap  him,  he  had 
been  careful  to  add  that  he  spoke  not  of  the  material  sword, 
but  of  the  sword  which  is  the  Word  of  God.  At  this  the 
members  of  the  council  cried  out,  twitting  him  with  the 
strange  inconsistency  of  his  reference  to  Moses'  sword,  if 
the  explanation  he  was  then  making  was  genuine. 

As  for  the  charge  of  having  broken  up  the  university  of 
Prague,  he  replied  that  the  question  of  giving  three  votes  to 
the  Bohemians  was  one  of  justice  and  conforming  to  the 
charters  of  Paris  and  Bologna.  , /JP 

The  main  objection,  underlying  all  the  accusations,  was 
Huss's  admiration  of  Wyclif  and  his  alleged  advocacy  of 
Wyclif's  teachings,  not  only  in  the  university  but  also  in  the 
pulpit.  To  this  charge  Huss  rephed  that  he  had  not  defended 
any  erroneous  doctrines,  which  in  this  quarter  or  that  might 
be  ascribed  to  Wyclif,  and  that  he  did  not  know  of  any  Bo- 
hemian who  had  defended  any  such  erroneous  doctrine.  He 
knew  of  no  Bohemian  who  had  been  a  heretic  or  was  a  heretic 
at  that  time.  WycUf  was  not  his  father.  And,  as  regards 
the  XLV  Articles,  he  persisted  in  his  refusal  to  assent  to  their 
condemnation  on  the  ground  that  the  doctors  themselves 
had  not  decided  to  which  category  they  severally  belonged 
— catholic,  heretical,  erroneous  or  scandalous.  As  for  his 
protest  against  Zbynek's  burning  of  Wyclif's  books,  Zbynek 
was  not  justified  in  his  action  and  had  no  business  to  burn 
them  without  first  reading  them  and  finding  out  what  were 
their  contents. 

He  had  said,  so  it  was  further  witnessed,  that  when  the 
monks  and  clergy  failed  in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  to  convict 
Wyclif,  the  very  heavens  had  come  to  WycUf's  help  with 
thunder  and  lightning,  and  the  earth  had  belched  forth  its 


2IO  JOHN  HUSS 

protest,  so  that  the  clergy  with  difficulty  escaped  the  rage 
of  the  populace.  And  then,  to  confirm  his  sympathy  with 
Wyclif,  he  had  exclaimed:  "Oh,  that  my  soul  were  there  where 
John  Wyclif s  soul  is!" — utinam  anima  mea  esset  ibi,  ubi  est 
anima  Joannes  Wyclif!  To  this  testimony  Huss  replied  that 
what  he  really  said  was,  that  he  knew  not  where  the  soul  of 
Wyclif  was.  He  hoped  that  WycHf  was  saved  and  that  his 
own  soul  might  be  there  where  he  hoped  Wyclif's  soul  was. 
At  this  point,  the  members  broke  out  in  loud  murmurs  of  de- 
rision, also  manifesting  their  feelings  by  shaking  their  heads. 

When  the  objection  was  read  that  Huss  had  appealed  from 
the  decisions  of  the  two  popes,  Alexander  V  and  John  XXIH, 
he  answered:  "Is  it  not  permissible  to  appeal  to  Christ? 
I  hereby  pubUcly  avow  that  there  is  no  safer  or  more  efficacious 
appeal  than  the  appeal  to  Jesus  Christ."  Here  again  the 
council  was  greatly  excited  and  abandoned  itself  to  derisive 
outcries.  Huss  went  on:  "The  law  allows  appeal  from  a 
lower  to  a  higher  judge,  and  who  is  a  more  mighty  and  just 
judge  and  who  able  more  effectually  to  help  the  burdened 
and  oppressed  than  Christ,  Christ  who  neither  errs  nor  is 
able  to  err?" 

D'Ailly  interposed  that  Huss  had  spoken  in  a  much 
milder  tone  in  his  tower  prison  at  Gottheben — where  Huss,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  statement,  had  had  many  hearings — than 
he  was  employing  before  the  council  and  assured  him  that 
his  change  of  manner  was  not  helping  his  case.  At  this, 
Huss  justified  liimself  by  declaring  that  in  the  tower  the 
inquisitors  had  spoken  to  him  kindly,  but  the  members  of  the 
council  seemed  almost  unanimously  to  be  vociferating  against 
him,  so  that  he  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  they  were  all 
his  enemies.^ 

When  d'Ailly  reminded  the  prisoner  that  in  the  audience 
before  the  pope  and  the  cardinals,  at  the  palace,  he  insisted 
that  he  had  come  to  Constance  of  his  own  free  will,  and  that 

1  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  282. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     211 

no  one,  not  even  the  king  of  Bohemia  or  the  king  of  the  Romans, 
could  have  forced  him  to  come  against  his  will,  Huss  repHed: 
"Yes,  and  there  was  no  one  there  to  shout  me  down,  but  here 
every  one  is  cr3dng  me  down."  Then,  speaking  to  the  main 
point,  Huss  went  on  to  make  the  famous  statement  already- 
quoted,  that,  indeed,  not  only  had  he  come  of  his  own  free  will, 
but  if  he  had  not  wished  to  come,  there  were  lords  in  Bohemia 
of  such  power,  who  loved  him,  that  he  could  have  found  safe 
refuge  in  their  castles;  for  that  neither  that  king — referring 
to  Wenzel— nor  this  one — referring  to  Sigismund — could 
have  compelled  hihi  to  come.  Shaking  his  head  and  changing 
to  an  indignant  expression  of  face,  the  cardinal  exclaimed: 
"What  temerity  !"  To  those  near  him,  John  of  Chlum  then 
remarked  that  what  Huss  said  was  true  and  that  he  himself, 
though  a  poor  knight,  would  have  held  Huss  for  a  whole  year 
against  all  enemies  and  that  there  were  many  and  great 
lords,  who  loved  him  and  had  the  strongest  castles,  who  would 
hold  him,  if  they  wished,  safe  in  the  face  of  both  those  kings. 

Finally  d'Ailly  reminded  Huss  that  in  the  tower  he  had 
expressed  himself  ready  to  submit  to  the  council's  decision 
and  he  recommended  him  at  that  time  to  rely  on  its  mercy 
and  not  attempt  to  explain  away  errors.  As  for  the  instruction 
which  he  sought,  the  cardinal  told  him  that  the  declaration 
of  the  doctors  was  final. 

At  this  juncture  Sigismund,  taking  an  active  part  in  the 
proceedings,  addressed  himself  to  Huss,  remarking  that  he 
had  given  him  the  passport — salvus  condudus — before  Huss 
left  Prague,  and  that  he  had  commissioned  Duba  and  John 
of  Chlum  to  accompany  him  in  order  that  he  might  have 
a  pubHc  hearing  in  Constance  and  be  able  to  answer  for  his 
faith.  Now,  he  had  had  a  fair  and  public  hearing,  and  he 
was  grateful  to  Duba  and  Chlum,  no  matter  if  there  were 
some  who  condemned  him  for  giving  a  salvus  condudus  to  a 
heretic,  or  at  least  to  one  suspected  of  heresy.  ''Therefore," 
he  continued,  "as  the  cardinal  has  just  counselled  you  so  I 


212  JOHN  HUSS 

counsel  you,  not  to  hold  on  obstinately  to  anything,  but  in 
the  things  proved  against  you  and  to  which  you  have  con- 
fessed place  yourself  wholly  at  the  mercy  of  the  holy  council, 
that  for  our  sakes  and  for  the  sake  of  our  brother  and  for  the 
sake  of  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia  the  council  may  accord  to 
you  some  grace,  and  that  you  may  receive  penance  for  the 
things  proved.  I  have  told  them  that  I  have  no  idea  of 
shielding  a  heretic.  Nay,  if  any  one  should  be  found  to  persist 
obstinately  in  his  heresy  I  would  wish  to  be  the  first  to  start 
the  fire  and  burn  him." 

To  this  address  Huss  replied  that  he  was  thankful  to  the 
king  for  the  passport  and  that,  in  coming  to  Constance,  he  had 
no  purpose  of  obstinately  defending  errors,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, his  purpose  was  to  correct  errors,  if  any  were  proved 
against  him.  Before  leaving,  Sigismund  promised  Huss,  at  the 
next  hearing,  a  written  statement  of  the  accusations  with 
which  he  was  charged.  Huss  was  then  conducted  to  his  prison 
by  the  bishop  of  Riga,  to  whose  care  both  he  and  Jerome  of 
Prague  had  been  committed. 

In  writing  of  the  incidents  of  this  hearing  of  June  7,  Huss 
said  that  two  EngHshmen  tried  to  set  forth  the  doctrine 
of  the  eucharistic  presence  but  broke  down,  one  of  them  when 
he  came  to  discuss  the  multiplication  of  Christ's  body.  The 
other  pronounced  Huss  another  Berengar.  This  monk  Be- 
rengar  was  condemned  at  a  Roman  synod,  1059,  for  his  denial 
of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  and,  falHng  upon  his 
face,  retracted.  Although  he  afterward  returned  to  his  former 
views,  he  was  protected  by  his  friend,  Gregory  VII.  He  re- 
gretted that  he  had  been  led  to  recant  by  fear  of  excommuni- 
cation from  the  church  and  the  worst  of  deaths  at  the  hands 
of  the  people.^ 

Huss  refers  also  to  the  hootings  and  hissings  which  greeted 
some  of  his  statements.     At  times  he  was  overwhelmed  by 

•  Schaff,  4  :  558  sqq.     Huss  refers  to  Berengar  at  length  in  his  de  cor  pore 
Christi,  Mon.  1  :  203. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE     213 

the  uproar,  so  that,  on  one  occasion,  Sigismund  had  to  call 
for  a  calm  hearing  for  the  accused.  Huss  represents  that  the 
demand  was  that  he  should  accept  the  council's  decision 
without  sufficient  reasons  being  given  for  his  doing  so  and 
without  being  shown  his  errors. 
/  On  the  8th  of  June,  the  last  formal  hearing  was  held. 
Sigismund  was  again  present  in  the  Grayfriars  refectory  and 
d'Ailly  was  the  prominent  judicial  character.  Thirty-nine 
articles  were  put  in  evidence,  twenty-six  of  them  taken  from 
Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church,  seven  from  his  tracts  against 
Palecz  and  six  from  his  tract  against  Stanislaus.^  As  the  arti- 
cles were  being  read  aloud,  an  English  ecclesiastic  read  the 
pertinent  text  from  the  original  of  Huss's  works  that  no  occa- 
sion might  be  left  for  controversy  over  his  exact  meaning. 
As  this  was  going  on,  d'Ailly  again  and  again  turned  to  the 
king  and  others,  remarking  that  the  excerpts  were  worse  and 
more  dangerous  than  the  formulated  articles  of  accusation 
made  Huss's  meaning  out  to  be. 

The  first  eight  articles  bore  on  predestination  as  the  distin- 
guishing mark  of  those  who  were  of  the  church  and  ran  sub- 
stantially as  follows :  The  universal  church  is  the  totality  of  the 
predestinate.  Paul  never  belonged  to  the  devil's  household,  al- 
though he  performed  certain  acts  worthy  of  the  body  of  the 
damned.  So  it  was  with  Peter  who,  by  the  Lord's  permission, 
was  guilty  of  perjury.  No  part  of  the  church  can  finally  fall 
away  for  the  reason  that  predestinating  love  never  fails.  j 

No  place  of  honor  or  human  election  or  any  other  visible 
and  tangible  mark  constitutes  membership  in  the  Catholic 
church.    Judas  had  the  marks  but  never  was  a  true  disciple  \y 

of  Christ. 

At  the  loth  article  declaring  that  only  followers  of  Christ  in 
this  life  can  be  called  Christ's  vicars,  and  that  if  the  supposed 

^  Doc,  286-315.  Eng.  transl.,  Gillett  i  :  582-600.  Hefele  gives  an  ab- 
breviated statement,  159-164.  Compare  the  anti-Wyclif  and  Huss  articles 
as  condemned  by  Martin  V,  Mirbt,  171  sq. 


214  JOHN  HUSS 

vicar  walks  in  other  ways  he  is  the  messenger  of  antichrist, 
the  leaders  of  the  council — prcBsidenles— -shook  their  heads 
and,  looking  at  one  another,  smiled.  The  12th  article  stated 
that  the  papal  dignity  had  been  derived  from  the  Ceesars. 
After  the  pertinent  section  from  the  Treatise  on  the  Church 
was  read,  Huss  deposed  that  so  far  as  the  outward  symbols 
of  power  and  temporal  goods  were  concerned,  the  papal 
dignity  had  its  origin  with  Constantine,  but  so  far  as  the 
spiritual  function  of  ruHng  the  church  went,  it  proceeded 
directly  from  Christ.  Here  d'Ailly  interjected  that  out  of 
respect  for  the  emperor,  the  Nicene  council  gave  him  the 
place  of  honor,  although  that  place  really  belonged  to  the 
pope.  Why  did  Huss,  therefore,  not  say  that  the  pope's 
supremacy  emanated  from  the  council  rather  than  from 
Caesar?  Huss  replied:  "On  account  of  the  dotation,  as  I 
have  said,  which  Caesar  made." 

Four  important  articles,  concerning  the  pope  and  the 
cardinals,  afi&rmed  that  the  Roman  pontiff  is  not  the  head 
of  a  particular  church  unless  he  be  predestinated  by  God, 
and  his  authority  is  null  and  void  unless  his  life  and  conduct 
be  conformed  to  Christ's  law;  nor  are  they  truly  cardinals 
who  refuse  to  follow  in  the  steps  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles. 
Here  d'Ailly  asserted  that  Huss  had  preached  and  written 
out  of  all  moderation  against  the  cardinals,  and  that  such 
preaching  was  not  necessary  for  the  people  but  ought  to  be 
practised,  if  practised  at  all,  in  the  presence  of  the  cardinals 
themselves.  To  this  Huss  made  the  reply  that  among  his 
auditors  had  been  priests  and  other  learned  men,  and  he  had 
spoken  as  he  did  so  that  they  and  future  priests  might  be  on 
their  guard.  The  cardinal  added:  "You  do  very  ill  to  attempt 
by  such  preaching  to  discredit  and  cast  down  the  church." 

Article  XVIII  set  forth  that  "no  heretic  should  be  handed 
over  by  the  ecclesiastical  power  to  the  civil  power  to  be 
punished  by  physical  death."  When  the  corresponding 
section  had  been  read  from  the  Treatise  on  the  Church,  Huss 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  215 

added  that  a  heretic  ought  to  be  instructed  kindly,  tenderly 
and  faithfully  from  the  sacred  Scriptures  and  by  reasons 
based  on  them — sacris  scripturis  et  rationihus  ex  illis — as 
was  Augustine's  custom  in  dealing  with  heretics.  He  had 
not  said  that,  after  having  been  thus  labored  with  and  refusing 
to  abandon  his  errors,  a  heretic  should  not  be  punished  even 
with  corporal  punishment.    At  this  there  was  a  buzz. 

Then  Huss  went  on  to  speak  of  the  chief  priests,  scribes 
and  Pharisees,  who  delivered  Christ  to  Pilate,  saying:  "It  is 
not  lawful  for  us  to  put  any  one  to  death."  These  were  more 
flagrant  murderers,  he  continued,  than  Pilate,  for  Christ  said: 
"He  who  hath  delivered  me  up  hath  the  greater  sin."  Then 
the  buzz  turned  to  a  tumult  and  the  council  cried  out:  "Who 
is  like  unto  those  scribes  and  Pharisees?  Do  you  pretend 
to  mean  those  who  deliver  a  heretic  over  to  the  secular  arm?" 
Huss  repHed:  "Those,  I  mean,  who  deliver  the  innocent  over 
to  the  secular  arm  for  death,  as  did  the  chief  priests  and 
Pharisees,  who  delivered  Christ  up  to  Pilate."  Then  they 
shouted:  "No,  no,  here  you  are  speaking  of  the  doctors." 
To  this  the  cardinal  of  Cambray  added:  "These  things  as 
stated  in  the  Treatise  are  much  more  serious  than  the  formal 
articles  indicate." 

The  19  th  article  asserted  that  civil  princes  should  compel 
priests  to  observe  Christ's  law.  So  far  as  the  report  goes 
there  was  here  no  criticism. 

Article  XX  set  forth  that  ecclesiastical  obedience  is  an 
invention  of  the  priests  of  the  church  and  outside  the  express 
authority  of  Scripture.  In  explaining  this  statement,  Huss 
said  that  there  are  three  kinds  of  obedience — spiritual,  due 
to  God;  civil,  due  to  the  state,  and  ecclesiastical,  due  to  the 
church;  the  last  enactments  being  derived  from  the  priest- 
hood. 

Article  XXI  set  forth  that  if  a  person  excommunicated 
by  the  pope  appealed  to  Christ,  the  punishment  due  excom- 
munication  is   suspended.    Here   Huss    added    that   it  was 


2i6  JOHN  HUSS 

true  that  he  had  made  a  final  appeal  to  Christ,  but  not  until 
two  years  and  more  after  his  procurators  had  failed  to  secure 
a  hearing.  To  this  d'Ailly  replied:  "So  you  wish  to  set  your- 
self above  Paul  who,  under  an  accusation  at  Jerusalem,  ap- 
pealed not  to  Christ  but  to  Caesar."  Huss  answered:  "Very 
well,  and  if  he  had  done  this  in  the  first  instance  he  would 
have  been  esteemed  a  heretic.  But  Paul  did  not  appeal  to 
Cassar  of  his  own  suggestion  but  by  the  revelation  of  Christ, 
who  had  appeared  to  him,  saying:  'Be  faithful,  for  thou  must 
go  to  Rome!'"  Here  the  members  of  the  council  fiilled  the 
chamber  with  derisive  laughter,  and  when  they  raised  the 
objection  that  Huss  had  officiated  at  the  mass  while  under 
the  sentence  of  excommunication,  Huss  explained  that  he 
had  ministered,  it  was  true,  in  divine  things,  but  under  the 
protection  of  his  appeal  to  Christ.  Asked,  if  he  had  been 
absolved  by  the  pope,  he  replied  in  the  negative.  At  this 
point  the  cardinal  of  Florence  nodded  to  the  notary  to  take 
down  Huss's  statement. 

In  Article  XXII  the  principle  is  laid  down  that  what- 
soever is  done  by  a  sinful  man  is  sinful,  and  by  a  virtuous 
man  is  virtuous.  D'Ailly  followed  up  the  reading  by  saying 
that  according  to  the  Scriptures  we  have  all  sinned,  and 
if  we  say  we  have  not  sinned  we  deceive  ourselves;  so  that  it 
would  seem  that  we  always  act  sinfully.  Huss  replied  that 
here  the  reference  was  to  venial  sins,  which  may  exist  in 
conjunction  with  a  virtuous  habit  of  mind.  Here  an  English- 
man, called  WilHam,  interjected:  "But  these  things  do  not 
comport  with  acts  morally  good."  Quoting  Augustine, 
Huss  replied:  "If  thou  fillest  thyself  with  wine  thy  Hfe  blas- 
phemes, no  matter  what  praises  thy  tongue  may  recite." 
Clamor  prevented  the  defendant  from  proceeding,  as  they 
shouted  that  the  quotation  had  no  application  to  the  prop- 
osition. This  William  seems  to  have  been,  as  Wylie  suggests, 
WilHam  Gorach,  or  Grach,  principal  of  Hart  Hall,  Oxford, 
and  later  vice-chancellor  of  the  university  in  1439. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE    217 

Articles  XXIII  and  XXIV  demand  for  the  true  priest 
the  right  to  preach  in  spite  of  a  sentence  of  excommunication. 
Here,  Huss  explained  that  he  had  reference  to  an  unjust 
sentence  at  variance  with  the  written  law  and  the  Word  of 
God.  A  priest  conforming  his  Ufe  to  God's  precepts  has  no 
business  to  cease  from  preaching  nor  should  he  stand  in  fear 
of  an  unjust  prohibition  as  though  it  were  a  ground  of  condem- 
nation. The  Florentine  cardinal  Zabarella,  remarked  that 
there  were  laws  demanding  that  even  an  unjust  censure  was 
to  be  dreaded.  Huss  answered  that,  as  he  remembered, 
there  were  eight,  reasons  for  dreading  excommunication. 
''No  more  than  that?"  retorted  the  cardinal,  to  which  Huss 
replied:  "There  may  be  more." 

'  Article  XXV  stated  that  ecclesiastical  censures  are  of 
antichrist  invented  by  the  clergy  for  the  subjection  of  the 
people  and  its  own  exaltation.  These  the  laity  are  under  no 
obligation  to  obey. 

Article  XXVI:  The  interdict  should  not  be  laid  upon 
the  people,  seeing  that  Christ  did  not  fulminate  this  censure 
either  in  view  of  his  own  injuries  or  the  treatment  given  to 
John  the  Baptist.  Here  d'Ailly  again  interposed  that  there 
were  even  worse  things  on  this  subject  in  the  Treatise  on 
the  Church  than  this  formula.  Huss  denied  the  form  of  the 
article. 

The  articles  extracted  from  Huss's  work,  written  against 
Palecz,  aroused  most  demonstration  and  clamor.  The  first 
asserted  that  if  the  pope,  a  bishop  or  prelate  are  in  mortal  sin 
they  are  not  pope,  bishop  or  prelate.  After  the  reading  of 
the  original  text,  Huss  said  that  the  statement  was  true  not 
only  of  prelates  but  also  of  kings.  If  a  king  was  in  mortal 
sin  he  was  not  a  king  in  the  sight  of  God.  He  quoted  I  Sam. 
15  :  26,  where  the  Lord  said  through  Samuel  to  Saul,  who 
should  have  put  the  Amalekite  to  death  but  did  not:  "In 
that  thou  hast  rejected  my  word  I  will  also  reject  thee  that 
thou  mayest  be  king."     Although  Saul  in  the  sight  of  men 


2i8  JOHN  HUSS 

might  have  been  considered  king  after  this  act  of  disobedience, 
yet  in  reahty  he  was  not. 

At  that  moment  Sigismund,  who  happened  to  be  standing 
at  the  window  of  the  refectory,  was  remarking  to  the  count 
palatine  and  the  burgrave  of  Niirnberg,  who  stood  outside, 
that  in  all  Christendom  there  was  no  such  heretic  as  John 
Huss.  The  members  of  the  council  followed  Huss's  statement 
by  crying  out:  "Call  in  the  king."  As  the  king  did  not  hear, 
those  on  the  platform  cried  out  over  the  heads  of  those  stand- 
ing near  the  king:  "Bring  him,  that  he  may  hear,  for  what  is 
being  said  concerns  him."  Upon  request,  Huss  repeated 
what  he  had  said,  and  when  he  had  concluded,  Sigismund 
remarked:  "John  Huss,  there  is  no  man  who  doesn't  sin — 
ne^no  sine  crimine  vivit^  And,  as  reported  by  Mladenowicz, 
d'Ailly,  wishing  to  excite  the  secular  princes  still  more  against 
the  accused,  asked  whether  it  was  not  enough  for  him  to  have 
attempted  in  his  writings  to  revile  and  humble  the  spiritual 
estate.  Did  he  now  wish  to  cast  down  the  royal  office  also? 
Palecz  then  went  on  to  explain  that  king  and  pope  were  names 
of  offices,  and  the  name  Christian  was  intended  to  express 
merit,  so  that  a  pope  could  be  a  real  pope,  or  a  king  a  legitimate 
king,  even  if  they  were  not  true  Christians.  Hesitating  a  Httle, 
Huss  retorted  that,  if  that  exposition  was  well  made,  it  might 
be  applied  to  Balthasar  Cossa,  John  XXIII,  who  had  been 
deposed.  If  he  was  a  true  pope,  why  had  he  been  deposed? 
To  this  Sigismund  made  the  remark  that  until  recently  mem- 
bers of  the  council  had  held  to  Balthasar  on  the  ground  that 
he  was  the  true  pope,  and  he  was  deposed  from  the  papacy 
because  of  his  notorious  wickednesses,  which  had  scandalized 
the  church  of  God,  and  because  he  had  plundered  the  church's 
goods. 

The  2d,  3d  and  4th  articles  concerned  predestination, 
and  stated  that  a  reprobate  pope  was  not  a  member  of 
the  militant  church  and  consequently  not  head  of  the 
church  militant,  and  that  such  a  pope  or  prelate  was  no 


BEFORE  THE   COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE    219 

shepherd,  but  a  thief  and  a  robber.  Here  Huss  seems  to 
have  Hmited  the  meaning,  which  the  article  has  on  its 
face,  by  declaring  that  what  was  said  was  true  from  the 
standpoint  of  merit — quoad  meritum.  In  the  sight  of  God 
such  persons  were  not  pontiffs  and  prelates,  although  in  the 
sight  of  men  and  in  view  of  their  election  they  might  be 
treated  as  such.  Rising  behind  Huss,  a  black-hooded  monk 
of  Fuerstat  warned  the  synod  not  to  be  deceived  by  Huss's 
explanations,  even  though  they  might  be  found  in  his  books, 
for  he  had  himself  tested  Huss  and  satisfied  himself  that  they 
were  originally  not  in  the  books,  and  the  explanations  Huss 
was  making  he  had  gotten  from  him.  Turning  upon  the 
objector,  Huss  replied  that  his  views,  as  explained  by  him 
that  day,  were  stated  in  his  books,  and  he  reiterated  that 
the  case  of  John  XXIII,  now  called  Balthasar,  illustrated 
his  position  exactly.  If  he  was  not  true  pope,  then  he  was  a 
thief  and  robber.  At  this,  the  members  of  the  council  looked 
at  one  another  and  laughed  in  derision,  exclaiming:  "Indeed, 
he  was  true  pope!" 

Article  V  declared  that  the  pope  is  not  and  should  not 
be  called  most  blessed.  To  this  Huss  added  that  it  is  said  of 
Christ:  "Thou  alone  art  holy.    Thou  alone  art  the  Lord." 

Article  VI,  stating  that  a  pope  living  contrary  to  the 
example  of  Christ,  though  he  were  canonically  elected,  ascends 
to  the  papacy  not  through  Christ,  Huss  explained  by  saying 
that  the  matter  was  not  put  in  these  words  in  his  book;  but 
he  affirmed  that,  if  a  pope  or  other  prelate  live  contrary  to 
Christ,  in  pride  and  other  vices,  he  does  not  ascend  to  his 
office  through  Christ,  the  humble  door,  even  though  elected 
in  a  human  way,  but  climbs  up  some  other  way.  Judas, 
though  chosen  to  the  apostolate  by  Christ,  nevertheless  did 
not  ascend  through  Christ  into  the  sheepfold  of  the  church, 
for  he  was  a  thief  and  the  son  of  perdition.  Palecz  tried  to 
parry  the  force  of  Huss's  words,  but  Huss  went  on  to  main- 
tain his  position  by  quoting  from  Scripture. 


220  JOHN  HUSS 

Article  VII  charged  Huss  with  representing  the  con- 
demnation of  the  XLV  WycUfite  Articles  as  irrational  and 
iniquitous,  and  that  no  one  of  them  was  heretical,  erroneous 
or  scandalous.  When  d'Ailly  said,  "Master,  and  did  you 
not  say  that  you  are  not  minded  to  defend  any  of  Wyclif's 
errors,  and  yet  from  your  books  it  appears  that  you  did 
defend  these  articles  publicly,"  Huss  rephed  that  he  had 
no  idea  of  defending  any  errors  of  WycHf,  or  the  errors  of  any 
one  else,  but  that  it  was  against  his  conscience  to  assent  with- 
out explanation  to  the  condemnation  of  Wyclif's  articles 
when  there  was  nothing  to  allege  from  Scripture  against  them; 
and  the  general  condemnation  of  the  articles  as  a  whole  would 
not  hold.    Some  of  them  were  not  open  to  condemnation. 

Thereupon  the  six  articles  drawn  from  Huss's  book  against 
Stanislaus  were  taken  up.  Among  them  were  the  statements 
that  Christ  might  rule  his  church  much  better  through  his 
disciples  scattered  through  the  earth  and  apart  from  ''such 
wicked  heads"  as  the  prelates  sometimes  were,  and  that 
neither  the  popes  were  the  universal  pastors  of  Christ's 
sheep  nor  was  Peter.  In  favor  of  the  first  proposition  he 
adduced  the  cases  of  John  XXIII,  who  had  been  deposed, 
and  Gregory  XII,  who  had  resigned.  And  he  went  on  to  say 
that,  though  there  was  at  that  time  no  papal  head,  never- 
theless Christ  had  not  ceased  from  governing  his  own  church. 
The  statement  called  forth  the  derision  of  the  assembly. 

Article  VI,  read  that  "The  Apostles  and  the  Lord's  faith- 
ful priests  in  things  necessary  to  salvation  governed  the 
church  before  the  papal  office  was  introduced."  At  this, 
the  members  exclaimed:  "See,  he  turns  prophet!"  Huss 
reaffirmed  the  statement  made  in  the  charge  and  again  in- 
sisted that  at  that  time  there  was  no  pope;  and  that  things 
might  go  on  that  way  for  two  years  or,  for  aught  any  one 
knew,  for  an  indefinite  time.  Palecz  interjected:  "Ah,  and 
that  is  highly  possible,  is  it?"  Huss  answered  that  it  was 
quite  possible.    At  this  point  Stokes,  the  Englishman,  again 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  221 

stepped  in  and  twitted  Huss  upon  asserting  these  tenets  as 
if  they  were  his  own,  when,  in  fact,  they  were  not  really  his 
but  Wyclif 's.  The  path  he  was  following  was  the  path  trodden 
before  him  by  Wyclif. 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  reading  of  the  thirty-nine  articles, 
d'Ailly,  addressing  Huss,  pointed  out  that  there  were  two 
ways  open  to  him — one,  of  putting  himself  completely  at  the 
council's  mercy,  in  which  case,  out  of  respect  for  Sigismund 
and  the  king  of  Bohemia  and  for  Huss's  own  good,  the  coun- 
cil would  be  moved  to  deal  with  him  graciously  and  in  a 
humane  manner — pie  et  humaniter.  The  other  was  of  asking 
for  another  audience  that  he  might  defend  himself  once  more, 
but  in  this  case  he  should  bear  in  mind  that  he  had  already 
been  heard  by  many  distinguished  men  and  doctors  who  had 
given  reasons  against  the  thirty-nine  errors  and  there  was 
danger  of  his  being  still  further  involved  if  another  audience 
were  accorded.  In  a  friendly  spirit,  as  he  remarked,  he 
counselled  Huss  to  take  the  former  course.  Others  joined  in 
advising  him  to  throw  himself  on  the  council's  mercy. 

To  this  advice  Huss  replied  with  bowed  head,  repeating 
what  he  had  said  often  before,  that  it  was  of  his  own  free  will 
he  had  come  to  Constance  and  with  no  purpose  of  obstinately 
defending  his  views,  but  in  the  hope  of  being  informed  of  his 
errors,  if  he  held  any  and,  in  that  case,  of  submitting  to  the 
council.  He,  therefore,  asked  that  an  audience  be  granted 
him  that  he  might  have  opportunity  to  expound  his 
meaning  concerning  the  articles  adduced  against  him,  at 
the  same  time  assuring  the  council  that,  if  his  reasons  and 
writings  were  considered  to  be  against  the  truth,  he  would 
humbly  submit  to  the  better  information  offered  by  the 
council.  Great  commotion  followed  these  remarks,  many 
crying  out  that  he  seemed  willing  to  yield  to  the  council's 
information  but  not  to  its  correction  and  definition.  Huss 
replied  that  he  was  ready  to  yield  in  all  three  ways.  D'Ailly 
then   demanded:   i.  That   he   abjure   the   heretical   articles 


22  2  JOHN  HUSS 

approved  by  sixty  doctors.^  2.  Swear  never  to  preach  or 
teach  them  again.  3.  Make  public  renunciation.  4.  Promise 
to  uphold  and  preach  the  opposite. 

With  reference  to  the  advice  given  by  d'Ailly,  drawn 
from  the  weighty  sixty  names,  Huss  wrote,  under  date  of 
June  26:  "What  a  wonderful  piece  of  information!  By 
this  reasoning  the  virgin  St.  Catherine  ought  to  have  receded 
from  the  truth  and  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  because  fifty 
doctors  opposed  her!  Truly  this  beloved  virgin  persisted 
unto  death  and  won  over  the  doctors,  a  thing  which  as  a 
sinner  I  am  not  able  to  do."  Huss  was  referring  to  Catherine 
of  Alexandria  who,  according  to  tradition,  received  the 
highest  place  in  the  liberal  arts.  Maximin  promised  the 
highest  rewards  to  the  philosopher  who  would  win  her  back 
to  paganism.  But  she  overcame  them  all  and  was  broken  on 
the  St.  Catherine's  wheel.  Her  body  was  transported  to  Mt. 
Sinai,  where  the  famous  convent  commemorates  her  memory. 

In  reply  to  d'Ailly,  Huss  affirmed  that  he  was  ready  to 
yield  to  the  council  and  be  informed,  but  he  asked,  for 
God's  sake,  that  the  snare  of  damnation  should  not  be  thrown 
about  him  and  that  he  be  not  called  upon  to  abjure  articles 
that  he  had  never  held  and  renounce  things  which  had  never 
been  in  his  heart,  especially  that,  after  the  consecration,  only 
the  material  bread  remains.  It  was  against  his  conscience 
to  abjure  articles  he  had  never  held  and  thus  to  tell  a  lie.  When 
he  called  his  conscience  to  witness,  many  cried  out:  "And 
did  your  conscience  never  intimate  to  you  that  you  had 
erred?"  At  this  point,  the  king  called  upon  Huss  to  yield 
to  the  cardinal's  counsel  and  put  aside  his  unwillingness  to 
abjure  all  the  erroneous  articles.  As  for  himself,  he  did  not 
wish  to  hold  a  single  error  and  would  abjure  all  errors,  even 
if  he  had  not  held  a  single  one.  To  this  Huss  replied  that 
the  word  abjure  did  not  properly  apply  in  such  a  case.    Zaba- 

'  Mladenowicz,  Doc,  308,  is  followed  by  Hefele,  7  :  167.  Huss  in  two 
letters  speaks  of  fifty  doctors,  Doc,  107,  140. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  223 

rella  then  interrupted  by  promising  Huss  that  a  carefully 
guarded  formula  of  abjuration  would  be  placed  in  his  hands. 

At  this  most  solemn  moment,  the  king  again  counselled 
Huss  to  abjure  his  errors  and  throw  himself  upon  the  council's 
clemency  in  the  hope  that  the  council  might  show  him  mercy, 
and  he  asked  him,  in  view  of  the  laws  under  which  the  doctors 
acted,  what  fate  he  might  expect  if  he  persisted  in  the  op- 
posite course.  To  this  Huss  made  answer  once  more  that 
all  he  asked  was  a  public  hearing,  in  which  he  might  set  forth 
his  plain  meaning,  and  that  he  was  willing  to  submit,  but  only 
in  so  far  as  he  did  not  thereby  offend  God  and  his  conscience — 
solum  quod  Deum  el  conscieniiam  non  offendam.  He  asserted 
that  the  main  charges  concerned  his  utterances  about  the  popes 
and  other  prelates. 

Yet  once  more  Sigismund  called  upon  the  prisoner  to 
choose  the  path  of  abjuration.  The  charges  had  been  at- 
tested by  two  or  more  witnesses  and  by  men  of  distinction — 
magni  viri.  In  case  he  refused,  the  council  would  proceed 
according  to  its  prescribed  rules.  At  this  point  a  certain  old, 
bald-headed  bishop,  so  Mladenowicz  writes,  ventured  to  inter- 
pose that  these  rules  were  contained  in  the  section  on  heretics 
in  the  Clemenlines  and  the  liber  Sexlus.  These  were  two 
books  of  the  canon  law. 

When  Huss  again  started  to  address  the  king  and  to  ex- 
plain the  reasons  for  his  coming  to  Constance,  he  was  in- 
terrupted by  an  outcry  that  he  was  obstinate,  had  held  his 
errors  many  years  and  had  no  intention  of  retracting.  A  fat 
priest,  sitting  at  the  window  and  clad  in  a  splendid  garment, 
called  out  that  the  accused,  in  case  he  did  abjure,  would 
abjure  not  with  the  heart,  but  only  with  the  tongue  and 
would  not  hold  to  his  word.  He  was  not  to  be  believed. 
Huss  again  protested  that,  as  a  faithful  Christian,  he  wished 
humbly  to  submit  to  the  decision  of  holy  mother  church. 
When  an  article  was  shown  him  directed  against  the  pope 
with  a  gloss  attached,  Huss  declared  the  gloss  had  already 


2  24  JOHN  HUSS 

been  shown  him  in  the  Dominican  prison,  but  that  he  was 
not  its  author.  He  thought  it  had  been  written  by  Jesenicz. 
Pressed,  Huss  declared  he  did  not  accept  its  teachings.  At 
this  point  in  his  report,  Mladenowicz  seems  to  apologize  for 
Huss's  answer  on  the  ground  of  the  sleepless  night  he  had 
passed,  racked  by  toothache  and  other  ills.  He  apparently 
was  retreating  from  his  true  views. ^ 

His  connection  with  the  services  attending  the  burial  of 
the  three  Prague  martyrs,  Martin,  Stafcon  and  John,  was 
then  adduced.  Enghshmen  produced  a  copy  of  a  letter  from 
the  university  of  Oxford  which,  as  they  said,  Huss  had  read 
in  a  sermon — at  the  same  time  showing  the  seal — with  the 
purpose  of  commending  Wyclif.  Huss  declared  he  had  read 
it  because  it  bore  the  Oxford  seal  and  was  brought  to  Prague 
by  two  students.  On  giving  the  name  of  Nicholas  Faulfisch 
as  one  of  the  students  and  pointing  to  Palecz  as  a  witness, 
Palecz  replied  that  Faulfisch  was  no  Englishman,  but  a 
Bohemian,  and  had  brought  with  him  to  Prague  a  piece  of 
stone  from  Wyclif's  tomb  which  afterward,  as  Huss  well 
knew,  was  revered  in  Prague  as  a  relic.  The  Enghshmen 
then  produced  another  writing,  certified  to  by  the  chancellor 
of  Oxford,  which  contained  two  hundred  and  sixty  errors 
taken  from  Wyclif's  writings,  which  were  sent  to  Constance 
for  condemnation. 

Before  the  breaking  up  of  the  assembly,  personal  ex- 
planations were  made  by  Palecz  and  Michael  de  Causis, 
assuring  the  council  that,  in  pleading  against  Huss,  they  had 
been  actuated  by  pure  motives.  They  called  God  to  witness 
that  they  had  been  moved  by  no  personal  bitterness,  but 
solely  by  regard  for  the  oath  they  had  taken  when  they 
became  doctors  of  theology.  In  reply  to  these  attestations 
Huss  exclaimed:  "I  stand  at  God's  tribunal,  who  will  judge 
me  and  you  justly,  according  to  our  merits."  D'Ailly  then 
commended  Palecz  and  the  other  doctors  who  had  presented 

'  Doc,  312. 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF   CONSTANCE    225 

the  accusations  based  upon  Huss's  writings  and  once  more 
pronounced  the  text  of  his  writings  as  more  worthy  of  con- 
demnation than  the  formulated  articles. 

In  reading  over  the  proceedings,  it  does  not  occur  to  us 
to  accuse  Palecz  of  unworthy  motives  or  to  doubt  that  there 
were  perhaps  a  number  of  men  in  the  council  who  were  anxious 
to  give  Huss  a  certain  amount  of  protection  and  to  grant 
him  a  fair  opportunity  of  extricating  himself  from  the  posi- 
tion in  which  he  was  placed.  Among  these  were  d'Ailly  and 
Zabarella,  men  who  had  no  doubt  of  his  serious  departure 
from  Catholic  doctrine. 

The  majority  of  the  councillors,  as  is  often  the  case  in 
ecclesiastical  assemblies  sitting  in  judgment  upon  erroneous 
doctrines,  real  or  alleged,  seem  not  to  have  been  ready  to 
listen  to  a  reasonable  discussion.  They  had  prejudged  the 
case.  Explanations  were  useless.  Retraction  was  their  de- 
mand. Huss  was  a  dangerous  heretic.  A  heretic  had  no 
standing.  He  was  the  embodiment  of  all  conceivable  wicked- 
ness, fit  only  for  the  flames  and  perdition. 

Sigismund,  as  we  may  believe,  with  an  eye  to  his  promise 
of  safe-conduct  and  his  standing  with  the  Bohemian  and 
Moravian  nobles,  sought  to  save  Huss  from  the  worst  fate.^ 
Of  the  obligations  under  which  he  was  placed  by  the  passport, 
we  shall  speak  further  on. 

Huss  was  an  innovator  whose  statements  struck  at  the 
root  of  church  authority.  The  rule  of  belief  and  action  he 
placed  in  the  Scriptures  as  interpreted  by  the  individual. 
From  our  standpoint,  the  principle  he  was  contending  for  was 
the  right  of  the  individual  conscience  in  the  presence  of  the 
open  Bible.  D'Ailly  and  the  council  took  the  opposite  ground. 
The  eminent  French  cardinal  knew  nothing  but  the  supreme 
authority  of  the  church.  As  represented  in  the  council  at 
Constance,  it  had  deposed  a  pope,  John  XXIII.  It  had  the 
right  to  settle  doctrine  and  what  it  said  was  law.     No  in- 

*  See  Palacky,  Gesch.,  Ill,  7  :  348-354.    Tschackert,  233  sq. 


226  JOHN  HUSS 

dividual  had  any  rights  against  that  tribunal — no  right  to 
teach  in  the  church,  no  right  to  life  itself.  Tschackert  says: 
**The  Bohemian  had  defined  the  church  as  the  body  of  the 
predestinate;  d'Ailly  had  a  different  conception.  To  recognize 
Huss,  d'Ailly  would  have  had  to  lay  down  the  purple." 

From  the  standpoint  of  our  own  age,  Huss's  appeal  for 
an  opportunity  to  present  his  views  in  a  detailed  and  con- 
nected form  was  proper,  but  the  canons  of  that  age  were 
otherwise.  Huss's  writings  were  in  the  hands  of  the  com- 
missions. They  had  been  examined  and  passed  upon  as 
containing  much  that  was  either  erroneous  or  heretical.  If 
allowed  standing,  the  structure  of  the  canon  law  would  fall. 
1  The  council  does  not  deserve  unmixed  blame.  It  was  the  crea- 
;  ture  of  its  age  and  its  predecessors,  and  the  same  palliation 
^  can  be  made  of  its  action  as  is  made  for  John  Calvin  in  Geneva. 
I  Its  misfortune  was  that  it  represented  the  system  which  had 
exalted  an  organization  at  the  expense  of  the  authority  of 
the  Scriptures  and  individual  rights  of  conscience.  The 
ground  Huss  occupied,  without  knowing  it,  was  radically  out 
of  accord  with  this  system  and  was  substantially  the  ground 
that  Luther  and  the  Protestant  Reformers  afterward  took, 
though  in  details  the  Protestant  Reformers  went  much  further 
than  he  did.  Let  the  Scriptures  be  taken  as  the  final  and 
sufi&cient  rule  of  human  opinion  and  conduct,  then  individual 
dissent  from  the  accredited  doctrines  of  the  church  ceases 
to  be  in  itself  an  iniquity,  a  crime. 

Had  Huss  been  allowed  to  make  a  formal  and  orderly 
defense,  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  issue  would  have 
been  the  very  same.  Measured  by  the  standard  of  his  times, 
judged  by  the  canon  law  and  by  the  practice  of  several 
centuries,  he  was  far  and  away  a  heretic  and  deserving  the 
penalty  which  the  Middle  Ages  accorded  to  heretics — perpet- 
ual imprisonment  or  death.  To  shift  the  ground  of  ac- 
—  countability  to  the  conscience  was,  as  d'Ailly  and  others 
stated,  a  principle  unknown  to  ecclesiastical  procedure.    The 


BEFORE  THE  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE  227 

fabric  built  up  by  councils  and  Schoolmen,  and  not  a  lonely 
priest's  opinion,  was  determinative  and  final. 

What  disappoints  the  student  of  the  council  of  Constance 
is  that  no  testimony  was  offered  by  any  of  the  councillors 
in  favor  of  Huss.  And  after  its  adjournment  not  a  single 
voice,  so  far  as  we  know,  was  raised  by  an  authoritative 
teacher  of  Europe  to  indicate  that  he  felt  that  the  council 
of  which  he  was  a  member  had  made  any  mistake.  Gerson's 
statement  that  if  Huss  had  had  an  attorney  he  would  have 
been  saved,  was  a  remark  he  made  in  pique,  in  view  of  the 
council's  refusal  to  condemn  tyrannicide. 

Huss's  clerical  friends  in  Bohemia  had  no  theological 
weight.  His  lay  friends  were  numerous  and  powerful,  but 
laymen  were  no  judges  in  matters  of  doctrine.  The  em- 
peror and  the  council  were  unanimously  against  him. 


CHAPTER  X 
CONDEMNED  AND  BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE 

Melius  est  bene  niori  quain  male  vivere;  propter  mortis  supplicium 
non  est  pcccandimi;  prcesentem  vitam  finire  in  gratia  est  exire  dc  miseria. 
— Huss's  letter  to  Christian  of  Prachaticz,  Ap.,  1413. 

Better  is  it  to  die  well  than  to  live  ill.  To  avoid  death  we  must  not 
sin.     To  end  the  present  life  in  grace  is  to  pass  out  of  misery. 

The  council's  session  being  over,  and  while  Huss  was  on 
the  way  to  his  prison  for  the  last  time,  John  of  Chlum  pressed 
through  the  crowd  and  took  his  hand.  The  recognition  was 
like  a  cup  of  water  from  a  far  country.  What  a  joy  it  was, 
Huss  wrote,  to  have  John  of  Chlum  stretch  forth  his  hand, 
not  ashamed  to  hold  it  out  to  him,  an  abject  heretic  bound 
in  chains  and  hooted  at  by  all.^ 

While  the  bolts  of  the  prison  were  being  fastened  upon 
him,  a  confidential  address  was  being  made  by  the  king  to 
the  council  before  it  scattered.  It  betrays  how  completely 
he  had  put  himself  on  its  side  and  how  ready  he  was  to  pro- 
ceed to  the  ultimate  verdict  demanded  for  obstinate  heretics, 
and  which  the  inquisition  was  accustomed  to  pronounce. 
Although  the  address  was  intended  only  for  the  prelates,  who 
still  Hngered  in  the  refectory  but  had  risen  to  retire,  some  of 
the  Bohemians — John  of  Chlum,  Wenzel  of  Duba  and  Peter 
Mladenowicz — after  taking  leave  of  Huss,  had  returned  with- 
out the  king's  knowledge  and  overheard  what  he  was  about 
to  say.  Of  the  many  charges  brought  against  the  prisoner, 
so  spoke  the  king,  any  one  of  them  was  sufficient  for  his  con- 
demnation. In  case  he  did  not  abjure,  he  was  to  be  burned 
or   otherwise   treated   as   the   ecclesiastical  laws   called   for. 

^  Doc,  no. 
228 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  229 

But,  even  if  Huss  abjured,  he  was  not  to  be  trusted,  for,  if 
allowed  to  go  back  to  Bohemia,  he  and  his  sympathizers 
would  disseminate  the  same  errors  and  also  new  errors,  and 
the  new  errors  would  be  worse  than  the  old.  He  should  be 
forbidden  altogether  to  preach  or  to  go  to  his  sympathizers. 
In  Poland,  the  errors  had  a  large  following  as  well  as  in  Bo- 
hemia, and  the  council  should  direct  his  brother,  the  king  of 
Bohemia,  and  the  princes  and  prelates  to  destroy  them  branch 
and  root,  wherever  they  might  be  found.  In  the  mouth  of 
two  or  three  witnesses,  as  it  is  written,  is  a  thing  established. 
The  council  should  make  a  clean  sweep  of  all  his  disciples  and 
especially  of  the  one  detained  at  Constance.  ''Who  do  you 
call  him?"  The  king's  defective  memory  being  supplied  by 
members  of  the  council,  the  king  went  on  to  say:  "Yes, 
Jerome — he  is  the  pupil  and  Huss  is  the  master."  If  you 
have  done  with  that  one — Huss — in  a  single  day,  you  will 
have  little  trouble  in  dealing  with  the  other.  "I  was  a  young 
man,"  he  concluded,  "when  this  sect  arose  and  started  in 
Bohemia,  and  see  how  it  has  grown  and  multiphed."  As 
Palacky  says,  these  words  of  Sigismund  spoken  in  a  corner 
of  the  Franciscan  refectory  soon  resounded  throughout  all 
Bohemia  and  cost  the  speaker  little  less  than  the  crown  of 
a  kingdom.^  Sigismund  was  soon  to  take  leave  of  the  council 
and  what  was  done  he  wanted  done  quickly.  He  referred 
to  his  approaching  journey  to  Spain,  whose  purpose  was  to 
induce  Benedict  XIII  to  resign.  According  to  Mladenowicz, 
the  members  left  the  refectory  in  high  spirits  over  the  king's 
words. 

During  the  remaining  four  weeks  of  his  life  spent  in  the 
Grayfriars  prison,  Huss  wrote  a  number  of  letters  to  his 
friends  in  Constance  and  Bohemia,  now  in  Czech,  now  in 
Latin.  All  the  while  he  was  suffering  from  physical  weakness 
and  pain.  The  wonder  is  that  the  prisoner  had  any  spirit 
left.  On  June  8,  the  last  day  of  public  hearing,  he  looked 
» Gesck,  III  :  357. 


230  JOHN  HUSS 

exceedingly  pale — valde  pallidus.  He  was  worn  out  not  only 
with  the  anxiety  of  prolonged  imprisonment,  but  with  ag- 
gravated ailments — hemorrhages  and  vomiting,  the  stone, 
headache  and  toothache — so  that,  as  he  himself  wrote,  his 
nights  were  spent  without  sleep.^  What  snatches  of  sleep 
he  caught  were  disturbed  by  dreams.  Among  many  others 
was  the  vision  of  hosts  of  serpents  with  heads  at  their  tails, 
but  not  one  able  to  harm  him. 

The  comfort  of  receiving  communications  from  his  friends 
was  not  entirely  withdrawn.  Letters  found  their  way  to 
him,  and  he  asked  that  they  be  not  written  on  large  sheets 
lest  they  arouse  suspicion  and  fail  to  reach  his  cell.  Toward 
the  end  of  the  period,  perhaps  with  reference  to  Paul's  letters 
written  from  his  captivity  in  Rome,  he  closed  letter  after 
letter  with  the  words,  *' written  in  prison  in  chains,"  or  "bound 
in  prison  in  chains,  expecting  death,"  or  "written  in  chains 
in  expectation  of  the  flames.  "^ 

The  respite  before  his  auto-da-fe  was  evidently  prolonged 
in  order  that  no  effort  might  be  spared  to  induce  Huss  to 
abjure.  He  was  interviewed  by  many  persons,  sent  to  per- 
suade him  to  that  act.  Baskets,  as  he  called  them,  were  held 
out  to  him,  by  which,  if  he  chose  to  put  himself  in  them,  he 
might  escape.  Threats  and  persuasions  were  employed,  let 
us  hope,  more  from  the  sentiment  of  mercy  than  from  the 
ambition  to  break  up  a  heretic's  obduracy. 

Among  those  who  visited  him  were  Zabarella,  d'Ailly  and 
Palecz.  One  doctor,  who  urged  him  to  submit,  declared  that 
if  the  council  should  tell  him  he  had  but  one  eye,  he  was 
bound  to  agree  that  it  was  so.  To  this  suggestion  Huss 
replied  that  if  the  whole  world  told  him  he  had  but  one  eye, 
yet  he  could  not,  so  long  as  he  had  reason,  say  so  without 
doing  violence  to  his  conscience.  After  some  further  remarks 
the  doctor  left,  saying  that  Huss  was  right  and  that  the 
illustration  was  not  a  good  one. 

^  Doc,  io8,  312.  ^  Doc,  127,  129,  140,  etc. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  231 

For  one  of  the  visitors,  whom  Huss  called  "the  father," 
Huss  had  cordial  words  of  regard.  He  was  one  of  the  leaders 
of  the  council  and  it  has  been  conjectured  that  he  was  Zabarella 
or  the  cardinal  archbishop  of  Ostia,  but  his  identity  is  not 
known. ^  It  seems  evident  that  his  sympathy  for  the  prisoner 
was  unfeigned.  He  left  with  Huss  the  following  form  of  ab- 
juration, which,  while  it  committed  Huss  to  submission  to 
the  council  and  to  penance,  yet  distinctly  states  that  much 
charged  against  him  had  never  entered  his  mind.  The  paper 
runs  as  follows: 

Over  and  above  the  declarations  made  by  me,  which  I  desire 
to  be  understood  as  repeating,  I  declare  anew  that  although  much 
is  laid  to  my  charge  which  never  entered  my  mind,  nevertheless, 
in  the  matter  of  all  the  charges  brought  forward  I  hereby  submit 
myself  humbly  to  the  merciful  appointment,  decision,  and  cor- 
rection of  the  most  holy  general  council,  to  abjure,  to  revoke, 
to  recant,  to  undergo  merciful  penance,  and  to  do  all  things  and 
in  several  that  the  said  most  holy  council  in  its  mercy  and  grace 
shall  deem  fit  to  ordain  for  my  salvation,  commending  myself 
to  the  same  with  the  utmost  devotion.^ 

Two  letters  written  by  Huss  to  "the  father"  are  extant. 
After  expressing  his  debt  for  the  good  man's  loving  and  pa- 
ternal grace,  Huss  announced  he  could  not  submit  to  the 
council  on  the  terms  proposed.  Many  things  it  accounted 
scandalous  he  regarded  as  truth.  In  abjuring  he  would  be 
perjuring  himself  and,  more,  would  be  doing  injury  to  the 
cause  of  religion  among  God's  people  to  whom  he  had 
preached.  He  had  appealed  to  Christ,  the  most  mighty  and 
just  Judge,  and  it  was  better  that  he  should  die  than  secure 
a  temporary  escape  and  finally  fall  into  hell-fire. 

In  reply  "the  father"  reminded  Huss  that  there  were 
many  eminent  men  in  the  council  and  bade  him  listen  to  his 
mother,  leaning  not  on  his  own  understanding.     It  was  he 

'  Palacky,  Gesch.,  p.  361;  Workman,  p.  237. 

*  Doc,  121.    The  translation  is  from  Workman,  p.  238. 


232  JOHN  HUSS 

who  likened  Huss's  proposed  abjuration  to  the  basket  in 
which  Paul  was  let  down  from  Damascus  and  escaped.  He 
attempted  to  set  Huss's  scruples  aside  as  invalid  and  declared 
that,  in  submitting  to  the  council,  he  would  not  necessarily 
be  condemning  views  he  held,  but  be  doing  nothing  more  than 
acknowledging  the  authority  of  the  tribunal  which  condemned 
him.  The  responsibility  would  rest  upon  the  council.  And 
as  for  perjury,  the  opprobrium,  if  any,  would  fall  not  upon 
Huss,  but  upon  that  body  and  its  learned  men  who  pro- 
nounced the  sentence.  Augustine,  Origen  and  Peter  the 
Lombard  had  yielded  to  authority,  as  he  himself  on  one  occa- 
sion also  had  done  when  he  was  accused  of  being  in  error 
and  accepted  admonition.  The  final  Judge  had  appointed  the 
Apostles  and  their  successors  in  council  as  the  court  of  de- 
cision. 

In  his  second  letter  Huss  repeated  the  reasons  he  had 
given  in  the  first  for  declining  to  abjure,  for  abjuration  would 
necessitate  his  giving  up  many  truths  and  incurring  final 
punishment,  unless,  perchance,  he  should  repent  of  his  ab- 
juration before  death.  He  closed  by  expressing  the  assurance 
that  Christ  would  give  him  strength  to  hold  out  to  the  end. 
r  These  attempts  to  move  Huss  were  continued  almost  to 

'     the  last  moment  of  his  imprisonment,  but  the  many  exhorters 
j     — multipUces   exhortatores — using    "many    words,"    failed    to 
'     change  his  mind.^    He  was  not  willing  to  act  on  the  principle 
;     that  it  was  a  merit  to  confess  guilt  even  where  the  party  was 
I     innocent  and  the  tribunal  confessed  to  was  august  and,  as 
i     supposed,  divinely  appointed.     One  of  his  exhorters  told  him 
of  the  following  case:    A  book  was  placed  at  the  side  of  a 
saint's  bed.    He  was  accused  of  having  stolen  it  and  keeping 
it  hid  away.     On  denying  the  charge,  they  showed  him  the 
book  hid  away  in  his  bed.     The  saint  at  once  admitted  his 
guilt.    Another  exhorter  told  of  a  certain  nun  who  lived  in  a 
cloister  in  man's  clothes  and  was  accused  of  bearing  a  son. 

» Doc,  135. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  233 

The  nun  confessed  to  the  charge  and  kept  the  child,  but  later 
she  was  proved  to  be  innocent.  An  Enghshman,  come  on  a 
like  errand,  reminded  Huss  that  in  England  many  WycHfites 
had  signed  papers  of  abjuration  prepared  by  the  archbishops. 
He  went  on  to  say  that  if  he  were  in  Huss's  place  he  would 
abjure  for  his  conscience'  sake. 

The  underlying  idea  in  these  efforts  to  bring  Huss  to  an 
abjuration  while  he  continued  to  hold  to  the  things  abjured 
was  that  there  is  merit  in  obedience. 

At  Huss's  request  Palecz  came  to  see  him  yet  once  again,^ 
in  his  very  last  hours,  and,  for  the  very  reason  that  he  had  been 
a  most  determined  enemy,  Huss  asked,  though  in  vain,  that 
Palecz  might  be  appointed  as  his  confessor.  Palecz  proved 
to  be  like  one  of  Job's  friends.  "Every  one,"  he  had  said, 
"that  heard  you  preach  was  infected  with  the  heresy  of  the  re- 
manence  of  the  bread  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar."  He  now 
rejoined  that  he  had  not  said  every  one,  but  many  who  heard 
him  preach.  Huss  reaffirmed  his  statement,  and  went  on: 
Oh,  master,  how  dreadful  is  your  greeting  and  how  dread- 
fully you  are  sinning !  You  know  I  shall  die  here,  or  perhaps, 
if  I  rise  from  my  bed,  I  shall  be  burned.  What  reward  will 
then  be  given  you  in  Bohemia  !"  At  this  last  interview,  the 
aforetime  friends  shed  tears  together  and  Huss  begged  Palecz's 
pardon  for  any  opprobrious  word  he  had  uttered  and  especially 
for  the  epithet  "fiction-monger"  which  he  had  used  in  his  tract 
addressed  against  him.-  Huss  also  reminded  Palecz  of  what 
he  had  said  about  him  to  the  commissioners,  that  since 
Christ's  birth  no  heretic  had  written  more  dangerous  things 
against  the  church,  with  the  exception  of  Wyclif,  than  he 
himself.  Michael  de  Causis  also  was  several  times  at  Huss's 
prison  and  said  to  the  jailers  aside  that  by  God's  grace  Huss 
who  was  a  heretic  should  burn.  In  reporting  these  few  words, 
Huss  wrote  that  he  had  no  feelings  of  bitterness  and  was 
praying  for  Michael.^ 

^  Doc,  136  sq.  ^  Responsio  ad  Palecz,  Mon.,  i  :  318.  ^  Doc,  129. 


234  JOHN  HUSS 

Had  the  prisoner  still  a  flickering  hope  that  Sigismund 
might  exercise  a  veto  power,  it  was  quickly  snufifed  out.  He 
recalled  that  at  the  session,  June  8,  the  king  had  given  him 
assurance  of  an  opportunity  to  reply  in  writing,  an  assurance 
confirmed  by  d'Ailly,  and  also  a  promise  of  a  final  hearing.^ 
He  appealed  to  the  nobles  of  Bohemia  to  join  in  petitioning 
Sigismund  to  keep  his  promise.  Great  would  be  the  king's 
confusion,  he  thought,  if  he  failed  to  keep  it.  He  almost 
allowed  himself  to  think  that  Sigismund  from  the  beginning 
had  no  intention  of  treating  him  fairly.  Against  warnings, 
he  had  left  Bohemia.  Jerome  of  Prague,  the  good  cobbler, 
Andrew  the  Pole,  and  others  had  told  him  before  he  left  Pra- 
gue that  he  would  not  return.^  Huss  went  so  far  as  to  write 
that  Sigismund  had  condemned  him  before  his  enemies  did. 
The  king  might,  at  least,  have  imitated  Pilate  and  declared, 
"I  find  no  fault  in  this  man"  or,  in  view  of  the  safe-conduct, 
sent  him  back  to  Bohemia  to  be  judged  there  by  the  king  and 
clergy.  He  had  communicated  to  him  through  Lord  Henry 
Lefl  that,  in  case  the  king  did  not  approve  of  the  council's 
judgment,  he  would  be  sent  back  in  safety.  At  a  later  date, 
June  21,  apparently  lest  he  should  sin  in  not  returning  good 
for  evil,  he  wrote  that  he  thanked  Sigismund  for  all  the  kind- 
ness he  had  shown,  but,  in  spite  of  himself,  a  week  later  he 
expressed  the  opinion  that  Sigismund  had  acted  deceitfully 
throughout  the  whole  proceeding.^ 

His  thoughts  were  much  upon  Jerome,  "his  beloved 
associate."  He  had  no  word  from  him  except  that,  like 
himself,  he  was  also  languishing  in  a  foul  prison,  expecting 
death  on  account  of  the  faith  to  which  he  had  borne  such 
noble  witness  to  the  Bohemians. 

As  for  the  council,  he  drew,  in  his  letters,  from  his  own 
experiences  as  well  as  upon  what  he  heard.  He  contrasted 
the  spiritual  leaders  gathered  at  Constance,  who  called  them- 

'  The  king's  exact  words,  according  to  Huss,  were  infutura  audientia  scribere- 
tur  tibi  breviter  et  tu  respondebis  ad  illud.    Doc,  loi,  io8,  114. 

^  Doc,  III.  ^  Doc,  144. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  235 

selves  Christ's  vicars,  with  the  Apostles.  They  announced 
themselves  to  be  "the  holy  church  and  the  most  holy  council, 
which  cannot  err."  By  its  own  decree  the  council  had  declared 
itself  the  highest  authority  on  earth.  Nevertheless,  Huss 
continues,  it  did  err  by  falling  at  the  knees  of  John  and  kissing 
his  feet — the  recent  pope,  who,  according  to  the  council's 
own  declaration,  was  a  base  murderer  and  sodomite,  simoniac 
and  heretic.  In  regard  to  himself,  the  council  had  erred  at 
least  in  three  ways — by  making  up  false  articles  from  his 
books,  by  putting  false  interpretations  upon  some  of  them 
and  by  its  curtailed  quotations,  which  misrepresented  him. 
He,  therefore,  had  good  reason  for  believing  that  the  council 
was  not  infalHble,  and  happy  were  those  who  rejected  the 
pomp,  avarice  and  hypocrisy  of  antichrist  and  held  to  Christ 
as  the  head  of  the  church. 

As  for  the  pope,  how  mistaken  the  opinion  was  which 
Stanislaus  and  Palecz  had  set  forth,  that  he  is  the  head  of 
the  church,  its  sufficient  ruler,  its  vivifying  heart,  its  never- 
failing  fountain  of  authority  and  the  all-sufficient  refuge  to 
which  Christians  should  flee — seeing  that  at  the  time  he  was 
writing  there  was  no  pope  at  all ;  but  the  church  abides  with- 
out a  pope,  having  Christ  for  its  all-sufficient  head,  its  life- 
giving  fountain,  its  unfailing  refuge.  Again  he  returned  to 
the  fallibihty  of  the  council  and  of  the  pope,  whom  the  council 
had  sentenced  for  "the  crime  of  heresy."^  Let  the  preachers 
take  note  that  the  head  is  cut  ofif,  he  whom  once  the  council- 
lors pronounced  God  on  earth,  incapable  of  doing  sin  or  prac- 
tising simony — even  the  pope  who  is  the  heart  of  the  church, 
its  spiritual  Ufe-giver,  the  fountain  from  whom  proceed  all 
goodness  and  power,  the  sun  of  the  holy  church,  the  un- 
failing refuge  to  whom  Christians  should  run.  He,  the  head, 
is  cut  off.  God  on  earth  is  bound.  His  sins  are  openly  de- 
clared, the  fountain  dried  up,  the  sun  obscured,  the  heart 
torn  out,  the  refuge  fled  from  Constance.    The  very  men  who 

» Doc,  134,     Mon.,  I  :  341,  351. 


236  JOHN  HUSS 

voted  to  condemn  him  for  heresy  because  he  sold  indulgences, 
bishoprics  and  benefices — they  themselves  bought  these 
things  from  him  and  did  a  good  business  in  selling  them  over 
again.  John  of  Leitomysl  sought  twice  to  purchase  the  see 
of  Prague  for  money.  Why  did  the  cardinals  elect  him  pope 
when  they  knew  well  that  he  was  a  homicide  and  killed  the 
most  holy  father?  Here  Huss  was  referring  to  Alexander 
V,  whom  it  was  charged  John  had  murdered.  Why  did 
prelates  on  bended  knee  adore  him,  kiss  his  feet  and  call  him 
holy  father — sanctissimus  pater— when  they  knew  he  was  a 
heretic  and  a  sodomite?  Why  did  they  sufifer  him  to  practise 
simony  at  the  very  moment  he  was  exercising  the  functions 
of  supreme  pontiff? 

Seldom  has  there  been  a  more  terrific  characterization 
of  the  papacy  as  committed  to  bad  hands.  Though  nowadays 
John  XXIII  is  seldom,  if  ever,  given  a  place  by  Roman 
CathoHc  historians  in  the  Hst  of  legitimate  popes;  never- 
theless, he  was  elected  by  cardinals,  an  oecumenical  council 
was  convened  by  his  call  and  he  was  accepted  by  the  council 
of  Constance  as  pope  and  deposed  by  it  as  a  true  pope.  Other 
popes  had  been  as  bad,  some  of  whom  Huss  points  out  in  his 
writings  on  the  church.  John  XII,  954-964,  an  illegitimate 
son,  made  pope  at  sixteen,  was  charged  by  a  Roman  synod 
with  every  crime  of  which  depraved  human  nature  was  capa- 
ble— murder,  fornication,  perjury.  He  was  killed  in  the  very 
act  of  committing  adultery  and  was  said  to  have  drunk  the 
health  of  the  devil.  Of  some  of  the  popes  of  the  tenth  cen- 
tury even  a  Catholic  historian,  Mohler,  has  said  that  they 
were  horrible  popes,  whose  crimes  alone  secured  for  them  the 
papal  dignity.  Benedict  IX,  1033-1046,  elected  as  a  mere 
boy,  is  pronounced  by  Gregorovius  more  boyish  than  Caligula 
and  more  criminal  than  Heliogabalus.  It  seems,  he  says,  as 
if  a  demon  from  hell,  in  the  guise  of  a  priest,  were  occupying 
St.  Peter's  chair.^  Alexander  VI,  1492-1503,  was  yet  to 
*  Hisi.  of  the  City  of  Rome,  4  :  42,  47  sq. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  237 

come,  a  pontiff,  during  whose  reign  tragedy  after  tragedy 
occurred  in  the  papal  household,  his  children  married  in  the 
Vatican,  courtesans  openly  flaunted,  himself  a  voluptuary, 
a  man  of  untamed  sensuality,  leading,  as  Pastor  says,  a 
vicious  life  to  the  very  end.^ 

In  his  last  characterization  of  the  council,  June  26,  1410, 
Huss  called  it  proud,  avaricious  and  iniquitous  with  every 
crime.  It  had  done  more  harm  than  good.  The  councillors, 
he  wrote,  will  be  scattered  abroad  like  butterflies,  and  their 
decrees  last  as  long  as  spiders'  webs.  The  words  were  biting, 
but  there  was  some  truth  in  them,  notably  in  the  matter  of  the 
decision  by  which  the  oecumenical  council  was  pronounced  the 
supreme  tribunal  in  the  church.  Huss  felt  that  the  council 
had  striven  to  frighten  or  coerce  him  to  submission,  and  that 
the  resistance  he  was  able  to  offer  was  a  direct  gift  from  above. 

In  these  prison  hours,  his  thoughts  went  out  often  to 
his  "fatherland,"  Bohemia,  and  he  bewailed  the  contumely 
which  had  been  heaped  upon  it  on  his  account.  As  the  end 
of  his  life  drew  nearer,  his  references  to  his  faithful  Bohemian 
friends  became  more  and  more  tender.  As  a  result  of  the 
council's  dealing  with  him  and  the  opinions  he  represented, 
he  looked  forward  to  times  of  dire  persecution  in  Bohemia, 
in  which  the  lords  temporal  should  make  their  influence  felt, 
for  they  were  more  enHghtened,  he  wrote,  in  the  things  of 
the  Gospel  than  the  lords  spiritual.  He  urged  them  to  avoid 
all  unworthy  priests  and  to  love  good  priests,  according  to 
their  works,  and  to  prevent  other  lords  from  oppressing  good 
priests.  Of  the  fidelity  of  his  friends  in  Constance,  John  of 
Chlum  and  Wenzel  of  Duba,  he  could  not  say  too  much. 
He  expressed  his  warmest  obligations  to  the  Bohemian  and 
Moravian  noblemen  and  also  the  Polish  nobles  whose  appeals 
to  Sigismund  had  interceded  for  the  fair  treatment  the  royal 
safe-conduct  implied.  He  requested  them  to  give  heed  to 
the  reports  that  Chlum  and  others  would  carry  back  with 
'  Gesch.  der  Pdpsle,  3  :  vi,  501  sq. 


238  JOHN   HUSS 

them  to  Bohemia.  It  must  have  been  with  the  deepest  pang 
of  homesickness  that  he  expressed  the  hope  that  John  of 
Chlum  and  other  friends,  so  true  to  him  in  Constance,  might 
arrive  safe  in  their  native  land;  and  he  called  upon  them, 
when  they  got  back  to  Bohemia,  to  follow  the  king  who  never 
dies,  a  man  of  sorrows,  and  the  king  of  glory,  who  giveth  life 
eternal.^ 

He  sent  messages  of  affection  and  greeting  to  the  wives 
and  children  of  Bohemian  nobles.  In  urging  Wenzel  of  Duba, 
"that  noble  lord,"  to  put  away  the  vanities  of  the  world  and 
live  in  holy  matrimony,  he  represented  him  as  a  man  who  had 
been  a  soldier  in  many  countries  to  the  hurt  of  body  and  soul. 
Just  before  his  death  he  heard  of  Duba's  purpose  to  marry, 
and  he  wrote  him  a  letter  of  congratulation.^ 

His  references  to  Wenzel  and  his  queen,  Sophia,  show  his 
warm  attachment  to  those  sovereigns  and  his  obligations  for 
their  constant  kindness  and  for  their  zeal  in  seeking  to  secure 
his  release.  He  called  for  prayers  that  the  Lord  might  keep 
them  in  his  grace  and  at  last  give  them  eternal  joy.  In 
conveying  a  greeting,  a  week  before  his  death,  he  expressed 
the  hope  that  the  queen  might  be  loyal  to  the  truth  and  not 
take  offense  at  him  as  though  he  had  been  a  heretic,  and  in 
his  very  last  letter  he  mentions  the  name  of  "his  gracious 
mistress,  the  queen,"  and  begs  again  to  express  to  her  his 
thanks  for  all  the  favors  which  she  had  shown  to  him.^  His 
recollection  of  this  lady,  who  had  attended  the  services  at 
the  Bethlehem  chapel,  is  as  honorable  to  him  as  it  was  to 
her.  It  is  a  tender  note  when  he  expressed  the  fear  that  she, 
to  whom  he  was  so  much  indebted,  might  be  led  by  false 
reports  to  change  her  mind  toward  him  and  regard  him  as  a 
heretic. 

Nor  did  he  forget  his  other  friends,  not  so  lofty  in  position. 
To  Jesenicz  he  sent  a  message  urging  him  to  marry.  Writing 
to  Master  Martin,  he  sent  greetings  to  people  of  humble 

^  Doc,  127.  ^  Doc,  125,  146.  ^  Doc,  119,  127,  14s,  148. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  239 

station,  mentioning  some  of  them  by  name,  women  and  men, 
shoemakers  and  tailors— "all  his  beloved  brethren  in  Christ." 
No  wonder  that  a  man  of  such  warm  sympathies  should  have 
drawn  the  people  of  Bohemia  strongly  to  him. 

Martin,  with  whom  Huss  had  left  his  will  before  leaving 
Prague,  he  now  urged  to  live  according  to  Christ's  law  and 
preach  the  Gospel,  to  cast  out  the  love  for  rich  garments 
which,  alas,  he  himself  had  loved  and  worn.  He  bade  him 
take  delight  in  reading  the  Scriptures,  especially  the  New 
Testament  and,  when  he  did  not  understand  what  he  read, 
to  refer  at  once  to  the  commentators  he  had  at  hand.  He 
bade  him  hold  fast  whatever  he  had  heard  of  good  from  him 
and  to  cast  aside  anything  he  had  seen  which  was  unseemly, 
praying  to  God  for  him  that  God  might  deign  to  spare  him. 
Lament,  Huss  wrote,  the  past,  amend  the  present,  be  on 
your  guard  for  the  future.  He  was  referring  to  sins.  Do 
not  be  afraid  to  die  for  Christ,  if  thou  wouldst  live  with  Christ. 
Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body  but  are  not  able  to  kill 
the  soul,  and,  if  they  should  attack  him  for  his  adhesion  to 
himself,  reply:  "I  hope  the  master  was  a  good  Christian. 
As  for  the  things  which  he  wrote  and  taught  in  the  schools 
and  which  were  attacked,  I  do  not  understand  them  all  nor 
have  I  read  them  through."^ 

Nor,  in  these  solemn  hours,  did  he  forget  the  university 
to  which  he  owed  his  education  and  which,  through  him 
in  large  part,  had  become  the  scene  of  contention — the  place 
where  he  had  made  warm  friendships,  some  of  which  were, 
alas,  broken.  To  its  teachers  and  students,  "dearly  beloved 
in  Christ  Jesus,"  one  of  his  very  last  letters  was  addressed. 
He  expressed  regret  that  his  course  had  been  the  occasion  of 
division  when  he  hoped  it  would  make  for  union.  He  had  not 
abjured  his  books  or  their  teachings,  which  he  regarded  as 
truly  Scriptural.  He  sent  them  a  solemn  profession  in  these 
words : 

'  Doc,  119  sq. 


240  JOHN  HUSS 

I,  Master  John  Huss,  in  chains  and  in  prison,  now  standing 
on  the  shore  of  this  present  life  and  expecting  on  the  morrow  a 
dreadful  death— which  will,  I  hope,  purge  away  my  sin — find  no 
heresy  in  myself  and  accept  with  all  my  heart  any  truth  what- 
soever that  is  worthy  to  be  believed.^ 

The  last  words  of  this  letter  express  a  wish  that  the  uni- 
versity men  might  love  Bethlehem  chapel,  and  commended 
to  their  consideration  ''his  most  faithful  and  constant  sup- 
porter and  comforter,"  Peter  Mladenowicz. 

Huss's  affection  for  Bethlehem  chapel  was  expressed  in 
tender  messages.  In  a  letter  addressed  to  ''all  the  Bohemian 
people,"  he  begged  the  Praguers  to  support  the  chapel — 
sacellum — so  far  as  God  might  permit  his  Word  to  be  preached 
there.  On  account  of  it,  he  said,  the  devil  burned  with  great 
rage  and  he  had  excited  the  priests  against  it  when  he  saw  that 
his  kingdom  was  in  danger  of  being  overthrown  by  the  activity 
in  that  place.  He  expressed  the  hope  that  it  might  please 
God  to  preserve  that  chapel  and  that  it  might  become  more 
useful  through  the  ministry  of  others  than  it  had  been  through 
his  own.  The  prayer  was  not  destined  to  have  a  permanent 
answer.  Bethlehem  chapel  was  destroyed  by  the  Jesuits  in 
1786,  so  that  it  is  doubtful  if  a  single  vestige  of  it  remains. 

The  death,  whose  approach  Huss  had  constantly  before 
him  in  the  Franciscan  prison,  he  often  referred  to  as  "the 
dreadful  death."  He  was  left  in  complete  uncertainty  as  to 
its  date,  but  he  was  expecting  the  summons  at  any  moment; 
he  expected  it  to  be  by  fire.^  By  this  death,  he  hoped  to  be 
cleansed  and  purified,  like  the  old  martyrs,  from  his  sins  and 
made  meet  for  admission  to  the  presence  of  the  holy  Saviour. 
His  sufferings  in  prison  and  the  delay  of  his  death  had  given 
him  time,  as  he  wrote,  to  think  of  the  shame  endured  by 
Christ  and  to  meditate  on  his  cruel  crucifixion.  It  had  given 
him  time  to  consider  the  many  pangs  endured  by  the  saints, 
and  that  the  way  to  heaven  out  of  this  world  to  the  world 

^Doc,  143.  ^Doc,  117,  119,  129,  143,  144. 


BURNED   AT  THE   STAKE  241 

to  come  is  by  sorrow  and  tears.  So  the  martyrs  had  to  learn. 
They  were  cut  in  pieces,  buried  and  flayed  alive,  boiled  in 
caldrons,  quartered,  burned  and  otherwise  tortured  until  death 
gave  relief.  He  comforted  himself  also  by  the  example  of 
John  the  Baptist,  by  the  Maccabees,  who  were  ready  to  be 
cut  to  pieces  rather  than  to  eat  flesh — II  Mace.  6  :  18 — and 
by  Eliezer,  who  refused  to  deny  having  eaten  flesh  as  a  means 
of  escaping  martyrdom.  He  trusted  in  Christ  for  patient 
endurance  in  the  present  and  glory  hereafter.  He  prayed 
he  might  not  be  allowed  to  recede  from  the  divine  truth  nor 
to  swear  away  the  errors  falsely  charged  against  him.  And, 
from  time  to  time,  he  praised  God  for  the  help  he  had  given 
to  him  in  his  many  trials.  Thinking  of  Jerome,  he  felt  sure  -  — 
that  that  strong  man  would  be  of  a  braver  spirit  in  suffering 
the  ordeal  of  death  than  he  would  be,  "a  weak  sinner."  But 
especially  did  he  comfort  himself  by  the  examples  of  Paul  and 
Peter,  to  whom,  despised  and  put  to  death  by  men,  Christ 
gave  the  crown  of  glory,  receiving  them  into  the  heavenly 
fatherland.^ 

Nor  had  Huss  entirely  broken  loose  from  depending  upon 
the  merits  of  the  saints.  Several  times,  in  his  letters,  he 
referred  to  their  intercession  and,  in  one  of  his  very  last, 
written  to  John  of  Chlum,  June  29,  he  expressed  the  hope 
that  the  blessed  Peter  and  Paul  would  intercede  for  him  and 
render  him  strong  by  their  help,  to  become  a  partaker  of  their 
glory.  At  one  time  he  expressed  the  hope  that  God  would 
give  him  deliverance  ''through  the  merits  of  the  saints."^ 

It  was,  however,  not  without  a  great  struggle  that  he  sub- 
mitted. It  was  an  easy  thing  to  quote  and  expound  words 
of  Scripture,  but  it  was  most  difficult,  as  James  counselled, 
to  count  it  all  joy  to  be  in  the  midst  of  divers  trials.  Christ 
knew,  Huss  wrote,  that  he  would  rise  on  the  third  day,  and  "H"- 
on  the  eve  of  his  death  he  said:  "Let  not  your  heart  be 
troubled."  And  yet  he  also  said  in  the  garden:  "My  soul  is 
sorrowful,  even  unto  death." 

^Doc.y  117,  141,  143,  144.  'Doc,  loi,  131,  145. 


242  JOHN  HUSS 

In  one  of  his  letters  to  friends  in  Constance  he  offered  up 
the  petition: 

Oh,  loving  Christ,  draw  us,  weaklings,  after  thyself,  for  if  thou 
drawest  us  not  we  cannot  follow  thee.  Vouchsafe  a  brave  spirit 
,  that  it  may  be  ready.  If  the  flesh  is  weak,  let  thy  grace  go  before, 
^  proceed  in  the  middle,  and  follow.  For  without  thee  we  can  do 
nothing,  but  indeed  for  thy  sake  we  can  go  to  a  cruel  death.  Vouch- 
safe a  ready  spirit,  a  fearless  heart,  a  right  faith,  a  firm  hope  and 
a  perfect  love,  that  for  thy  sake  we  may  lay  down  our  life  with  all 
patience  and  joy.     Amen.^ 

Christ's  mercy  and  safe-conduct  could  be  relied  on  im- 
plicitly. To  John  of  Chlum  and  Duba  he  wrote:  "What 
God  promises  His  servants  He  performs.  What  He  pledges 
Himself  to  give,  He  fulfils.  He  deceives  no  one  by  a  safe- 
conduct.  No  servant  who  is  faithful  to  Him  does  He  send 
away.   ^ 

The  Scriptures  were  like  springs  of  living  water  at  which 
he  drank  deep  drafts  to  satisfy  his  spiritual  weariness.  Again 
and  again  he  stops  at  such  passages  as  these:  "Fear  not 
4-  them  that  kill  the  body  and  after  that  have  no  more  that 
they  can  do."  "If  any  man  will  come  after  me,  let  him  take 
up  his  cross  and  follow  me."  "Where  I  am  there  shall  my 
servant  be  also."  If  the  jail  of  Bedford  was  turned  into  a 
gate  of  heaven,  the  place  where  the  guide-book  to  the  heavenly 
country,  The  Pilgrirn's  Progress,  was  written,  so  also  in  the 
prisons  in  the  friaries  of  Constance  a  ladder  was  set  up  between 
heaven  and  earth  up  which  the  outgoings  of  the  Bohemian 
prisoner's  soul  ascended  and  down  which  descended  messages 
of  hope  and  strength. 

While  Huss  was  daily  waiting  in  expectation  of  death, 
the  council  held  on  its  way,  making  ready  for  that  event.  The 
protest  of  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  Bohemian  and  Moravian 
nobles  was  read  before  it,  June  12.  Three  days  later  the 
council  was  proceeding  with  the  work  of  legislating  against 
heresy  and  solemnly  forbade  the  giving  of  the  cup  to  the 
^  Doc,  131.  -Doc,  143. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  243 

laity.  This  notorious  edict  set  forth  that  the  cup  as  well  as 
the  bread  had  been  given  by  Christ  to  the  disciples  on  the 
night  of  his  betrayal  and  that  it  was  the  practice  of  the  early 
church  to  dispense  both  elements  to  all  believers.  Never- 
theless, in  the  course  of  time,  the  church  had  adopted  the 
custom  of  withholding  the  cup  from  the  laity  on  the  ground 
that,  as  the  Schoolmen  had  alleged,  the  whole  Christ  is  in  each 
of  the  elements.  The  refusal  to  follow  the  custom  of  the 
church  and  to  withhold  the  cup  from  the  laity  was  pro- 
nounced heresy.  All  bishops  and  inquisitors  were  commanded 
to  proceed  against  those  who  held  this  view  and  distributed 
the  cup  and,  in  case  they  remained  impenitent,  they  were 
to  be  turned  over  to  the  secular  arm.  The  edict  was  ordered 
sent  to  Bohemia,  where  it  called  forth  the  nickname  for  the 
councillors  at  Constance,  Doctors  of  Custom.  According 
to  Gerson,  the  church  was  to  depend  for  the  enforcement  of 
the  edict  more  upon  the  worldly  arm  than  upon  moral  per- 
suasion. The  edict  placed  the  church  above  the  plain  letter 
of  Scripture.^ 

The  occasion  of  this  legislation  was  the  practice  which 
had  sprung  up  in  Bohemia.  There  is  no  evidence  that  Huss 
had  distributed  the  wine  to  laymen.  After  his  departure  for 
Constance,  Jacob  of  Mies,  called  on  account  of  his  stature 
Jacobellus,  made  the  matter  the  subject  of  dissertation  at 
the  university,  where  he  had  been  a  master  since  1397.  At 
least  in  three  churches  of  Prague,  St.  Martin's,  St.  Adelbert's 
and  St.  Michael's,  the  cup  was  distributed.  The  apostolic 
vicar  sought  to  check  the  practice,  but  the  sentence  of  ex- 
communication pronounced  upon  those  using  the  cup  was  not 
heeded. 

When  the  news  of  the  innovation  reached  Huss  in  the 
Dominican  prison,  he  wrote   to  his   friends  in  Constance,^ 

*  Hardt,  4  :  334;  Schwab,  604  sqq.;  Hefele,  7  :  173,  takes  the  position  that 
this  decree  was  one  of  the  measures  intended  by  the  council  to  make  an  im- 
pression on  Huss.  ^  Doc,  gi. 


244  JOHN  HUSS 

reminding  them  of  a  tract  he  had  sent  forth  on  the  subject — 
whether  in  Constance  or  not  we  cannot  be  certain — and 
stating  he  had  nothing  further  to  say  in  addition  to  what  he 
had  there  said  concerning  the  teacliings  of  the  gospels  and 
Paul.  He  urged  his  friends  to  make  an  effort  to  secure  from 
the  council  permission  for  the  Bohemians  to  use  the  cup. 

The  council's  action,  at  its  thirteenth  session,  June  15,  was 
treated  by  Huss  as  a  renunciation  of  the  Gospel.  "What 
madness,"  he  wrote,  "to  condemn  as  an  error  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  and  Paul's  epistles,  wherein  Paul  said  he  had  received 
the  words  of  institution  not  from  man  but  from  Christ;  ay, 
to  condemn  as  an  error  Christ's  very  act  and  example  when 
he  ordained  the  cup  for  all  adult  Christians!  The  council 
actually  calls  it  an  error  that  believing  laymen  should  be 
allowed  to  drink  of  the  cup  of  the  Lord,  and  priests  persisting 
in  giving  them  to  drink  are  heretics.  Oh,  St.  Paul,  thou 
sayest  to  all  the  faithful,  'As  oft  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and 
drink  this  cup  ye  do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  till  he  come, ' 
that  is,  till  the  day  of  judgment,  and  now  it  is  said  that  the 
custom  of  the  Roman  Church  is  against  it!"^ 

Later,  June  21,  he  wrote  to  Hawlik  of  the  Bethlehem 
chapel  not  to  refuse  the  cup  of  the  Lord  which  the  Apostles 
dispensed,  for  there  is  no  Scripture  against  it,  but  only  custom. 
Custom  is  not  to  be  followed,  but  Christ's  example.  The 
council,  alleging  custom,  has  denied  the  communion  of  the 
cup  to  laymen,  and  the  priest  who  dispenses  it  is  a  heretic. 
What  madness  to  damn  Christ's  ordinance  as  an  error !  Huss 
urged  Hawlik  not  to  oppose  Jacobellus  longer,  lest  a  schism 
be  made  among  the  faithful— an  occurrence  which  would 
greatly  delight  the  devil.  Again,  in  a  letter  which  is  of 
doubtful  authenticity,  he  urged  the  priest  to  whom  it  was 
written  to  distribute  both  elements  at  the  Supper. 

The  tract  in  which  Huss  had  embodied  his  views  was 
written  apparently  before  he  left  Prague,  for  its  numerous 
quotations^  from  the  Fathers  seem  to  render  it  impossible 
^  Doc,  126.  ^  Doc,  gi,  128.    The  tract  is  found  in  Mon.,  i  :  52-55. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  245 

for  him  to  have  written  it  in  Constance.  It  is  entitled 
The  Reception  by  Laymen  of  Chrisfs  Blood  under  the  Form 
oj  Wine.  Nine-tenths  of  the  tract  is  taken  up  with  quota- 
tions from  the  accredited  church  authorities,  from  Cyprian, 
Jerome  and  Augustine  down  to  Albertus  Magnus  and  Lyra, 
Huss  cited  Gelasius,  who  declared  that  the  use  of  one  element 
cannot  be  separated  from  the  other  without  great  sacrilege. 
He  cited  Ambrose,  who  was  followed  by  Thomas  Aquinas,^ 
to  show  that  Christ's  flesh  is  eaten  for  the  welfare  of  the  body 
and  his  blood  for  the  well-being  of  the  soul.  He  also  cited 
the  commentator,  Lyra,  as  saying  that  in  the  primitive  church 
both  elements  had  been  distributed  in  the  sacrament.  Huss 
concludes  the  tract  by  dwelling  upon  the  accounts  in  Matthew 
and  I  Corinthians.  He  asserts  that  the  consecrated  layman 
should  partake  of  both  elements  as  much  as  the  priest,  for 
Paul  said:  "As  oft  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup  ye 
do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death." 

The  next  action  taken  by  the  council  bearing  on  Huss's 
case  and  of  which  he  heard  in  prison ^  was  the  decree  ordering 
his  books  burned — even  his  books  written  in  Czech,  which 
the  councillors  had  not  even  seen,  much  less  read — French- 
men, Italians,  Britons,  Spaniards,  Germans  and  persons  of 
other  countries.  Lest  his  friends  should  be  intimidated  by  the 
action,  he  reminded  them  that  Jeremiah's  prophecies  had  been 
burned  and  yet,  at  God's  command  and  while  the  prophet  was 
in  prison,  he  had  dictated  them  over  again  to  Baruch,  adding 
at  the  same  time  prophecies.  He  gave  his  authority  as  Jere- 
miah 35  or  45.  Mladenowicz  at  this  point  added  a  note  to  the 
effect  that  Huss  did  not  have  the  book  of  Jeremiah  at  hand 
and  that  the  exact  reference  was  chapter  36  [27].'  In  the  days 
of  the  Maccabees  books  were  burned;  and  in  the  times  of 
the  New  Testament  they  burned  holy  men  who  had  books 
of  the  divine  law  in  their  possession.    Cardinals  had  burned 

^  Corpus  jur.  can.,  de  Consec,  2  :  12.    Friedberg's  ed.,  i  :  1318. 
2  Doc,  134,  139. 
'  Doc,  132. 


246  JOHN  HUSS 

all  the  copies  of  Gregorys  Morals  they  could  lay  their  hands* 
on,  and  Chrysostom  was  condemned  for  heresy  by  two  coun- 
cils and  yet  he  was  afterward  exonerated. 

The  same  treatment,  burning  in  the  flames,  continued  long 
after  Huss's  death  to  be  prescribed  by  the  authorities  for 
unwelcome  publications.  The  custom  held  on  well.  Even 
in  New  England,  by  the  order  of  the  Massachusetts  legisla- 
ture, one  of  the  very  first  theological  books  produced  on 
our  soil,  William  Pynchon's  The  Meritorious  Price  of  Our 
Redemption,  was  burned,  1650. 

To  the  charges  brought  against  him  by  the  council,  Huss 
replied  on  July  i  in  a  formal  confession  written  with  his 
own  hand,  repeating  that  it  was  his  purpose  not  to  recant. 
It  runs  thus: 2 

I,  John  Huss,  in  hope  a  priest  of  Jesus  Christ,  fearing  to  offend 
God  and  fearing  to  fall  into  perjury,  do  hereby  profess  my  un- 
willingness to  abjure  all  or  any  of  the  articles  produced  against 
me  by  false  witnesses.  For  God  is  my  witness  that  I  did  not  preach, 
afifirm  or  defend  them,  though  they  say  that  I  did.  Moreover,  con- 
cerning the  articles  extracted  from  my  books,  I  say  that  I  detest 
any  false  interpretation  which  any  of  them  bears,  but  inasmuch 
as  I  fear  to  offend  against  the  truth  or  to  gainsay  the  opinion  of 
the  doctors  of  the  church,  I  cannot  abjure  any  one  of  them.  And, 
if  it  were  possible  that  my  voice  could  now  reach  the  whole  world — 
as  at  the  day  of  judgment  every  lie  and  every  sin  that  I  have 
committed  will  be  made  manifest — then  would  I  gladly  abjure 
before  all  the  world  every  falsehood  and  error  which  I  had  either 
thought  of  saying  or  actually  said.  I  write  this  of  my  own  free 
will  and  choice. 

Writing  to  his  friends,  he  had  reiterated  again  and  again 
that  he  had  not  recalled  or  recanted  a  single  one  of  the  ar- 
ticles. He  pronounced  them  shameless  and  trumped  up 
against  him  by  false  witnesses.     Although  some  of  them  were 

^  Platina,  Life  of  Savianns.  Gregorovius,  2  :  94,  rejects  the  story  in  the  form 
in  which  it  is  told  by  John  the  Deacon,  Migne,  vol.  XXV.  John  the  Deacon 
speaks  of  the  people  and  not  the  cardinals  having  burned  the  books. 

2  The  text  is  in  Hardt,  4  :  389.  Engl,  transl.  by  Workman,  275.  Palacky, 
Doc,  does  not  give  it,  but  his  Gesch.,  Ill,  i  :  363,  speaks  of  it  as  genuine. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  247 

called  scandalous,  yet  were  they  in  agreement  with  the  Scrip- 
tures and  the  doctors  of  the  church.  If  he  were  shown  good 
reasons  for  so  doing,  he  would  correct  them.  But,  as  he  wrote 
to  the  university  of  Prague,  he  refused  to  do  so  simply  upon 
the  bare  authority  of  the  council.  They  must  be  shown  to 
be  plainly  out  of  accord  with  the  Scriptures — nolui  nisi 
scriptura  ostenderet  falsitatem.  The  council,  as  he  wrote  at 
another  time,  had  not  attempted  to  refute  him  by  a  single 
text  taken  from  Scripture  or  by  any  other  arguments.  On  the 
contrary,  in  its  attempts  to  silence  him,  it  had  used  threats 
and  deception.^ 

He  stuck  to  the  ground  that  he  could  not  abjure  errors 
he  had  never  held.  This  was  a  matter  of  conscience,  and  he 
refused  to  accept  the  view  presented  by  those  sent  to  persuade 
him  to  abjure  on  the  basis  of  the  council's  supremacy.  For 
him  to  abjure  would  have  meant  a  renunciation  of  false  doc- 
trine, whether  the  charges  against  him  were  well  taken  or  not. 
He  denied  that  there  was  any  merit  in  submitting  to  the 
church.2 

A  final  deputation  visited  Huss,  July  5,  including  Cardinals 
d'Ailly  and  Zabarella,  the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  the  archbishop 
of  Milan,  the  bishop  of  Riga,  and  the  English  bishops  of  SaHs- 
bury  and  Bath.  This  influential  deputation  came  by  Sigis- 
mund's  direction,  and  was  accompanied  by  the  two  faithful 
Hussite  nobles,  Duba  and  John  of  Chlum.  Huss  was  led  out 
of  prison  to  meet  the  deputies  who  sought  to  secure  from  him 
a  recantation,  but  in  vain.  Addressing  him,  John  of  Chlum 
said:^  "Master,  we  are  laymen  and  cannot  advise  you,  but 
if  you  feel  that  you  have  written  anything  hurtful,  do  not 
shrink  from  being  instructed  in  regard  to  the  charges  brought 
against  you.  If,  however,  you  do  not  feel  yourself  guilty, 
follow  your  conscience  and  do  not  do  anything  against  it. 
Do  not  lie  in  God's  sight,  but  stand  firm  till  death  in  the  truth 

^  Doc,  117,  137,  140,  142.  ^  Doc,  134. 

^Hardt,  4  :  386.     Mladenowicz's  account  of  the  interview,  Doc,  316-324. 


248  JOHN  HUSS 

as  you  have  known  it."  At  these  honest  words  Huss  wept 
and  said:  "Doctor  John,  know  well  that  if  I  felt  that  I  had 
written  or  preached  anything  contrary  to  the  law  and  to 
holy  mother  church  which  is  erroneous,  I  would  recall  it, 
God  being  my  witness.  But  I  have  always  desired  and  still 
desire  that  they  show  me  out  of  the  Scriptures  things  better 
and  more  close  to  the  truth  than  the  things  I  have  written 
and  taught.  And,  if  they  are  shown  me,  I  am  most  ready  to 
recall  them." 

At  this  point  one  of  the  bishops  exclaimed:  "So  you  want 
to  be  wiser  than  the  whole  council!"  To  this  Huss  replied 
that  he  did  not  want  to  be  wiser  than  the  whole  council,  but 
he  asked  that  they  give  him  even  the  least  member  sitting 
in  the  council  to  instruct  him  by  Scriptures  more  weighty 
and  cogent  than  those  he  had  used,  and  he  was  ready  forth- 
with to  recant.  This  statement  was  met  by  the  bishops  with 
the  exclamation:  "See,  how  obstinate  he  is  in  his  heresy!" 

The  last  scenes  were  to  occur  on  the  following  day,  the 
6th  of  July.  After  more  than  eight  months  of  dismal  im- 
prisonment, Huss  was  taken  and  led  to  the  cathedral,  where 
the  council  held  its  fifteenth  session.  Sigismund  was  there, 
wearing  his  crown,  and  at  his  side  Ludwig,  count  palatine, 
Frederick  of  Niirnberg,  Henry,  duke  of  Bavaria,  and  a  mag- 
nate of  Hungary,  whose  function  it  was  to  carry  the  insignia 
of  empire — the  imperial  apple,  the  crown,  the  sceptre,  and  the 
sword. ^  There  was  a  full  attendance.  The  cardinal-arch- 
bishop of  Ostia  presided.  Huss,  who  was  conducted  to  the 
cathedral  by  the  bishop  of  Riga,  remained  outside  the  door 
while  the  mass  was  being  sung.  He  was  then  taken  inside, 
and,  reaching  a  small  platform  in  the  middle  of  the  church 
raised  Uke  a  table,^  he  knelt  and  prayed  for  some  time.    On 

1  Mladenowicz's  account,  Doc,  316-324.  The  account  of  John  Barbatus, 
Doc,  556-558.    Richental,  78  sqq.;  Hardt,  4  :  407-500. 

^  Sedes  ad  modiim  menscz — Mlad.,  Doc,  217.  Posilus  in  medio  scamno  alio. 
Hardt,  4  :  389.  See  also  Mansi,  27  :  747.  Ubi  erat  levatus  in  alltim  scamnum 
pro  eo. 


BURNED   AT  THE   STAKE  249 

the  platform  were  placed  the  priestly  robes  used  at  the  cele- 
bration of  the  mass. 

The  proceedings  were  opened  with  an  address  by  the 
bishop  of  Lodi  on  Romans  6:6:  ''that  the  body  of  sin  might 
be  done  away."  The  prelate  represented  that  the  extermina- 
tion of  heretics  was  a  work  most  pleasing  to  God.  He  dwelt 
upon  the  familiar  illustrations  for  heresy — a  rotten  piece  of 
flesh,  the  little  spark,  which  unless  checked  turns  to  a  great 
flame  and  burns  up  the  house,  the  creeping  cancer,  the  scabby 
member  of  the  flock.  The  more  virulent  the  poison  the 
swifter  should  be  the  application  of  the  cauterizing  iron. 
Not  less  bad  was  the  prisoner  than  Arius,  who  was  a  spark, 
a  glim.m.er— scintilla — in  Alexandria,  but  because  the  spark 
was  not  immediately  put  out  it  depopulated  almost  the  whole 
world  with  its  flame.    And  much  worse  was  he  than  Sabellius. 

With  lurid  strokes  he  pictured  the  evils  that  had  grown 
out  of  the  Prague  heresies,  even  to  the  murder  of  priests, 
the  daily  contempt  to  which  Christ's  bride,  the  mother  of 
the  faithful,  was  given  over,  and  the  mocking  disregard  of 
the  keys  of  the  church.  The  abomination  of  desolation  was 
worse  in  that  day  than  in  the  old  days  of  the  cruel  persecution 
of  the  Christian  martyrs.  Then  the  body  was  oppressed; 
in  church  schisms  the  souls  of  men  are  destroyed.  In  the 
former  case  human  blood  was  spilled;  in  schism  the  orthodox 
faith  is  put  to  shame.  That  persecution  of  the  pagan  world 
was  to  many  as  salt;  this  schism  to  many  as  death.  Under 
fierce  pagan  tyrants  the  faith  grew;  in  schism  the  faith 
perishes.  Tyrants  sinned  in  ignorance ;  in  schism  many  sin  in 
knowledge  and  in  obstinacy.  By  schism  ecclesiastical  liberty 
suffers  injury  and  the  unity  enjoined  is  set  aside.  All  the 
laws  of  religion  and  sanctity  are  relaxed.  Heretics  should  be 
coerced  and  damned,  that  the  body  of  sin  may  be  destroyed. 

In  the  style  of  Bossuet,  more  than  two  centuries  later, 
when  he  preached  before  Louis  XIV  and  appealed  to  him  to 
proceed  against  church  dissenters  and  eulogized  him  as  another 


t 


250  JOHN  HUSS 

Constantine,  Theodosius  and  Justinian,  the  bishop  of  Lodi, 
pressed  upon  the  king  the  obligation  to  bind  up  the  lacerated 
wounds  of  the  church,  to  heal  the  gaping  schism  and  to  ex- 
tirpate heresy.  For  that  work  the  king  was  elected  of  God, 
deputed  from  heaven  before  he  was  chosen  on  earth.  By 
executing  it  he  would  secure  unending  fame  and  unfading 
glory — perpetua  Jama  et  Celebris  gloria. 

The  sermon  over,  the  council's  proctor,  Henry  of  Piro, 
announced  that  the  council  would  continue  the  prosecution 
of  John  Huss,  and  an  admonition  was  made  forbidding  all 
demonstrations  with  hand  or  foot,  all  applause  or  words  of 
disapproval  or  other  interruption  of  any  sort.  The  articles 
drawn  from  WycUf's  writings  and  condemned  by  the  uni- 
versity of  Oxford  were  read.  A  bishop  then  read  from  the 
pulpit  the  thirty  articles  taken  from  Huss's  writings  and  the 
proceedings  connected  with  his  hearing.  At  the  reading  of 
the  very  first  article,  defining  the  church  as  the  totality  of 
the  elect,  Huss  attempted  to  speak,  but  was  interrupted  by 
d'Ailly,  who  bade  him  keep  silence  and  wait  till  the  whole 
list  had  been  read,  when  he  might  make  a  reply.  To  this 
method  Huss  objected  on  the  ground  that  he  would  not  be 
able  to  remember  all  the  charges.  Cardinal  Zabarella  ex- 
claimed, "be  silent.  We  have  already  heard  you  enough," 
and  bade  the  beadles  keep  Huss  quiet.  Then,  with  folded 
hands  and  in  a  loud  voice,  Huss  cried  out:  "In  the  sight  of 
God,  I  demand  that  you  hear  me  lest  I  be  beheved  to  have  held 
errors.  Afterward  do  with  me  what  you  please."  When  it 
was  evident  that  the  council  was  in  no  mood  to  listen,  he 
bent  on  his  knees  and,  lifting  his  eyes  to  heaven,  prayed 
fervently. 

When  the  charges  were  read  that  the  accused  held  to  the 
remanence  of  the  bread  and  the  invalidity  of  acts  done  by  a 
priest  in  mortal  sin,  Huss  again  attempted  to  reply;  and  again 
Zabarella  commanded  him  to  be  silent.  But  Huss  persisted, 
saying  that  he  had  never  held,  taught  or  preached  that  the 


BURNED  AT  THE   STAKE  251 

bread  remains  in  the  sacrament  after  the  words  of  consecra- 
tion. A  new  charge  was  introduced,  that  he  had  taught  there 
were  in  the  Godhead  more  persons  than  three,  he  himself 
being  the  fourth.  This  charge  Huss  emphatically  denied, 
demanding  the  name  of  the  witness;  but  he  was  answered 
by  the  announcement  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  name  him. 
Huss  solemnly  protested  that  such  a  blasphemy  had  not 
entered  into  his  mind  and  that  he  had  always  asserted  that 
the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  were  one  God,  one  in  essence 
and  three  in  personality.  It  seems  that  on  this  point  two 
priests  had  borne  witness,  the  one  having  heard  Huss  in 
Prague  and  the  other  having  gotten  it  by  common  rumor. 
Similarly  Peter  the  Lombard  had  been  charged  at  the  fourth 
Lateran  council  with  teaching  a  quaternity  in  the  Deity,  but 
he  was  not  charged  with  regarding  himself  as  a  member  of 
the  Godhead,  as  was  Huss. 

The  appeal  Huss  had  made  to  God  was  also  condemned. 
At  this  point,  the  prisoner  exclaimed  with  a  loud  voice:  ''Oh, 
Lord  God,  see  how  this  council  condemns  thy  acts  and  thy 
law.  I  persist  in  saying  that  there  is  no  appeal  more  sacred 
than  the  appeal  to  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  not  moved  by  the 
low  motive  of  reward  or  deceived  by  false  testimony,  but 
gives  to  every  man  what  he  deserves." 

When  the  charge  was  read  that,  while  he  was  under  the 
ban  of  excommunication,  Huss  had  been  guilty  of  contumacy, 
continuing  to  preach  and  to  say  mass,  he  again  denied  having 
been  contumacious  on  the  ground  that  he  was  under  the 
protection  of  his  appeal  to  the  Higher  Powers.  He  had  sought 
a  hearing,  but  his  procurators  had  been  imprisoned  or  other- 
wise treated  ill.  He  repeated  his  formal  protest  that  he  had 
come  to  the  council  of  his  own  free  will  and  to  give  reasons 
for  his  faith. 

During  the  proceedings,  when  Huss  referred  to  his  having 
come  to  Constance  under  a  royal  passport — the  salvus  conduc- 
tus — he  is  reported  to  have  fixed  his  eyes  on  Sigismund,  whose 


#  T/ 


252  JOHN  HUSS 

face  was  flushed  with  shame — ille  statim  vehementer  erubuit. 
This  incident  is  not  given  by  Mladenowicz  in  his  longer  ac- 
count, but  it  is  found  in  his  smaller  account  in  the  Bohemian 
language.^  A  hundred  years  later  Charles  V,  urged  to  seize 
Luther  at  Worms,  is  reported  to  have  replied:  ''I  will  not 
blush  like  my  predecessor,  Sigismund." 

Two    sentences    were    then   pronounced   by   an   Italian 
prelate,  the  bishop  of  Concordia,  the  one  ordering  his  books 
burned  and  the  other  pronouncing  Huss  a  heretic.    The  sub- 
stance of  the  former  is  as  follows:    "The  holy  general  council 
of  Constance  called  of  God  ...    As  a  bad  tree  is  known  by 
its  bad  fruits,  so  John  Wyclif  of  damned  memory  is  known 
by  his  deadly  teachings  and  the  sons  of  perdition  whom  he 
hath  begotten,  against  whom  the  holy  council  is  bound  to 
rise  up,  bastard  and  illegitimate  as  the  offspring  is,  and  to 
pull  out  the  errors  from  the  Lord's  field  as  noxious  vipers  and 
to  provide  proper  culture  that  the  cancer  do  not  wind  its 
way  on  to  the  destruction  of  others.     In  spite  of  the  holy 
council's  recent  condemnation  of  the  evil  teachings  of  John 
.Wyclif,  a  man  of  damned  memory,  to  the  fire,  John  Huss,  a 
(disciple  not  of   Christ  but  of  John  Wyclif,  the  heresiarch, 
ihas  spread  heresies  through  his  books  and  by  his  preachings 
land  has  in  the  presence  of  a  multitude  of  the  people  and  the 
(clergy  pronounced  John  WycHf  a  Catholic    man    and    an 
ievangelical  doctor — vir  catholicus  et  doctor  evangelicus.     And 
whereas  these  matters  have  been  fully  proved  before  the 
cardinals,  patriarchs,  the  archbishops,  the  bishops,  the  other 
prelates,  and  doctors  of  the  Scriptures  and  laws — this  most 
holy  council  of  Constance  declares  and  decrees  the  thirty 
articles  scandalous,  erroneous,  rash  and  seditious,  and  some 
notoriously  heretical,  and  doth  order  the  book  entitled  de 
Ecclesia  and  his  other  books  written  in  Latin  and  Czech  to 
be  pubHcly  burned  and,  wheresoever  found,  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  shall  publicly  commit  them  to  the  flames,  and 

1  Mon.,  2  :  518. 


BURNED   AT  THE   STAKE  253 

all  who  disregard  the  decree  shall  be  proceeded  against  by 
the  inquisitors  of  heretical  depravity."^ 

The  sentence  against  Huss  himself  was  in  substance  as 
follows:  It  declared  that  after  full  reports  from  the  com- 
mission appointed  by  the  council  and  from  masters  of  theology 
and  doctors  of  the  law  based  upon  the  testimony  of  many 
witnesses  worthy  of  credit,  the  council  found  that  John  Huss 
had  for  many  years  taught  many  things  evil,  scandalous, 
seditious  and  dangerously  heretical.  Having  God  only  before 
its  eyes,  the  most  holy  council  of  Constance  pronounced, 
decreed  and  declared  John  Huss  a  true  and  manifest  heretic, 
having  taught  errors  and  heresies,  since  long  time  condemned 
in  the  church  of  God,  and  preached  them.  He  had  stubbornly 
treated  with  contempt  the  keys  and  ecclesiastical  censures 
and  had  interposed  an  appeal  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as 
Supreme  Judge,  in  which  he  laid  down  positions  scandalous 
to  the  apostolic  see  itself  and  belitthng  ecclesiastical  censures 
and  the  keys.  The  council  condemned  him  as  a  misleader  of 
the  people,  who  had  seduced  them  from  the  faith  in  Bohemia 
by  his  teachings  and  writings.  Inasmuch  as  he  was  incor- 
rigible and  unwilHng  to  return  to  the  bosom  of  holy  mother 
church  and  abjure  his  heresies,  it  ordered  him  to  be  degraded 
from  the  priesthood.  And,  having  in  mind  that  the  church 
of  God  had  no  other  course  open  to  it,  the  coimcil  relinquished 
him  to  the  secular  authority  and  decreed  that  he  was  to  be 
turned  over  to  it.^ 

Not.  a  dissenting  voice  was  raised  against  the  sentence. 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  reading  of  this  verdict,  Huss  ex- 
claimed in  a  loud  voice  that  he  had  never  been  obstinate 
nor  was  he  then,  but  that  he  had  always  desired  more 
weighty  information  from  the  Scripture,  and  especially  did  he 
desire  it  that  day.    After  the  reading  of  the  previous  sentence 

^  Mon.,  I  :  335  sq.;  Hardt,  4  :  436  sq.,  Eng.  transl.;  Gillett,  2  :  58-60. 
'  Attento  quod  ecdesia  Dei  non  habcat  ultra  qiiod  agere  valeat  jiidicio  seculari 
relinquitel  ipstim  curice  seculari  relinquendum  fore  decernit.    Hardt,  4  :  437. 


254  JOHN  HUSS 

against  his  books,  he  exclaimed  that  the  council  had  not 
pointed  out  a  single  error  in  them,  and  begged  that  alleged 
errors  might  be  pointed  out  and,  as  for  his  books  in  the 
vulgar  Bohemian,  he  asked  how  the  council  could  condemn 
what  it  had  never  looked  upon  with  its  own  eyes.  Huss  fell 
upon  his  knees  and  prayed  that  out  of  his  great  mercy  Christ 
might  pardon  his  enemies — those  who  had  falsely  accused 
him  and  suborned  false  witnesses.  The  prayer  was  received 
by  the  council  with  indignation  or  ridicule. 

The  process  of  Huss's  degradation  from  the  priesthood, 
as  ordered  in  the  sentence,  followed  at  the  hands  of  seven 
prelates,  including  the  archbishop  of  Milan  and  the  suffragan 
bishop  of  Constance.^  The  white  robe  of  the  altar  was  placed 
on  him.  At  this  he  said:  ''When  my  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was 
led  from  Herod  to  Pilate,  he  was  clad  in  a  white  robe."  Being 
asked  to  recant,  he  turned  to  the  assembled  throng  and,  with 
tears  in  his  eyes,  refused,  saying:  "I  fear  to  do  this  thing  lest 
I  be  found  a  liar  in  the  eyes  of  the  Lord  and  also  lest  I  sin 
against  my  conscience  and  God's  truth — ne  conscientiam  et 
Dei  veritatem  ofendam.  I  have  not  held  the  articles  falsely 
ascribed  to  me,  but  rather  have  I  taught  and  preached  the 
opposite.  I  also  refuse  to  abjure  lest  I  give  offense  to  the 
multitude  to  whom  I  have  faithfully  preached  God's  Word." 
At  this,  a  priest  sitting  near  him,  cried  out:  "See,  how 
hardened  he  is  in  his  wickedness  and  obstinate  in  his 
heresy!" 

Huss  then  stepped  down  from  the  platform  and  the  bishops 
divested  him  of  the  priestly  robe  and  took  from  him  the 
chalice  they  had  placed  in  his  hands,  accompanying  the  act 
with  the  objurgation:  "0  cursed  Judas,  who  hast  spurned  the 
counsels  of  peace  and  hast  taken  counsel  with  the  Jews,  we 
take  from  thee  this  cup  of  redemption."  To  this  Huss  replied: 
''My  trust  is  in  the  Lord  God  Almighty,  for  whose  name  I 

'  Richental,  p.  80;  Mon.,  i  :  36;  Hardt,  4  :  433,  437.    The  accounts  differ 
in  regard  to  the  number  of  the  prelates  taking  part  in  this  ceremony. 


BURNED   AT  THE  STAKE  255 

patiently  suffer  this  blasphemy,  for  He  will  not  take  away 
from  me  the  cup  of  His  redemption  and  I  firmly  hope  that 
to-day  I  shall  drink  it  in  His  kingdom."  When  all  the  priestly 
garments  had  been  removed,  the  bishops  proceeded  to  cut  the 
prisoner's  hair  so  as  to  disfigure  the  tonsure.  Here  discussion 
arose  whether  it  should  be  cut  off  with  razor  or  with  scissors. 
The  latter  counsel  prevailed  and,  looking  at  the  king,  Huss 
exclaimed:  "See,  how  these  bishops  are  not  able  to  agree 
in  their  blasphemy!"  After  this  ceremony  they  said  in  sub- 
stance: the  church  had  gone  as  far  as  it  could;  it  had  de- 
prived him  of  his  priestly  authority;  there  was  nothing  left 
but  to  deUver  him  over  to  the  secular  arm.  A  paper  cap 
was  put  upon  his  head  about  eighteen  inches  in  height — a 
cubit — with  three  devils  pictured  on  it  plucking  at  a  soul, 
and  on  it  written :  Heresiarch.  The  bishops  then  pronounced 
the  formula  committing  his  soul  to  the  devil — committimus 
animam  tuam  diabolo.  To  this  Huss,  raising  his  hands  to 
heaven,  repHed:  "And  I  commit  it  to  my  most  gracious  Lord, 
Jesus  Christ."  And  referring  to  the  cap,  he  said:  "The  crown 
my  Saviour  wore  on  his  most  sacred  head  was  heavy  and 
irksome.  The  one  I  wear  is  easy  and  Ught.  He  wore  a  crown 
of  thorns  even  to  the  most  awful  death,  and  I  will  wear  this 
much  lighter  one  humbly  for  the  sake  of  his  name  and  the 
truth."! 

The  ecclesiastical  ceremony  of  degradation  being  over  and 
the  church's  responsibility  for  the  heretic  at  an  end,  the 
prisoner  thenceforth  was  under  the  sole  jurisdiction  of  the  civil 
power,  to  which  the  council's  sentence  had  committed  him. 
Sigismund  turned  Huss  over  to  Ludwig,  the  count  palatine, 
with  the  words:  "Go,  take  him" — vade  accipe  eum — "burn 
him  as  a  heretic.  "^  Putting  him  under  the  guard  of  the  city 
soldiery,  they  led  him  to  the  place  of  his  death.  While  the 
council  continued  its  sitting,  the  procession  passed  along  on  its 
dismal  way.  As  Huss  noticed  the  flames  which  were  consum- 
^  Doc,  321,  557.  "  Verhrenn  ihn  ah  ein  Kdtzer,  Richental,  p.  80. 


256  JOHN  HUSS 

ing  his  books  in  the  churchyard,  he  said  smiling  to  the  bystand- 
ers, not  to  believe  that  he  was  about  to  die  for  errors,  for  they 
were  falsely  imputed  to  him.  Almost  all  of  the  city  was  on 
the  streets — women,  as  Richental  is  careful  to  say,  as  well  as 
men — but  the  larger  part  of  the  throng  was  kept  back  from 
fear  that  the  bridge  at  the  Geltinger  Gate  might  break  down 
under  the  weight  of  so  great  a  crowd.  The  place  fixed  for  the 
execution  was  outside  the  city  walls,  in  a  meadow,  as  you  go 
toward  the  castle  of  Gottlieben,  and  where  a  cardinal's  ass 
had  recently  been  buried.  Perhaps  Huss  looked  on  to  the 
castle  itself,  where  he  had  endured  lonely  imprisonment  for 
two  months. 

Arrived  at  the  spot  appointed,  Huss  kneeled  and  sang 
psalms:  Have  mercy  upon  me,  0  God,  and  In  Thee,  0  Lord, 
do  I  put  my  trust.  Some  of  his  friends  remained  with  him  to 
the  end  and  heard  his  prayers.  Some  proposed  that  he  have  a 
confessor,  but  a  friar  on  horseback  dressed  in  a  green  mantle 
held  by  a  red  silken  band  replied  that  he  was  a  heretic  and 
deserved  no  confessor.  Another  account,  that  of  Richental, 
states  that  he  himself  asked  Huss  whether  he  wanted  a  con- 
fessor and  called  the  priest  Ulrich  Schorand.  Ulrich  asked 
Huss  whether  he  would  renounce  his  errors.  To  this  he 
replied  that  "it  is  not  necessary,  I  am  no  mortal  sinner." 
Huss  had  confessed  in  prison  and  been  absolved  by  a  ''doctor 
monk,"  who  listened  to  him,  as  Huss  himself  writes,  in  a 
kindly  and  right  beautiful  spirit,  absolved  him  and  gave  him 
advice,  but  did  not  enjoin  him  to  do  what  the  commissioners 
had  advised  him  to  do.^ 

He  was  about  to  speak  to  the  bystanders  in  German,  but 
the  count  palatine  would  not  allow  it.  While  he  was  engaged 
in  prayer,  his  paper  cap  fell  off.  Huss  smiled,  and  the  by- 
standers, picking  it  up,  placed  it  again  on  his  head  with  the 
wrong  side,  however,  fore,  remarking  that  its  wearer  should  be 
burned  up  with  his  masters,  the  devils,  whom  he  had  served. 

^  Doc,  136;  Mlad.,  Doc,  322. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  257 

Rising  from  prayer  and  so  as  to  be  heard  by  his  friends  near 
by,  he  said:  ''Lord  Jesus  Christ,  I  wish  to  bear  most  patiently 
and  humbly  for  thy  Gospel's  sake  and  the  preaching  of  thy 
Word,  this  dire,  ignominious  and  cruel  death."  Once  again 
he  urged  all  not  to  credit  the  articles  charged  against  him. 
His  outer  garments  being  removed,  his  hands  were  tied  with 
ropes  behind  his  back  and  bound  to  a  stake.  When  they 
noticed  that  his  face  was  toward  the  east,  a  position  which 
did  not  beJ&t  him  because  he  was  a  heretic,  they  turned  his 
body  so  that  it  should  face  the  west.  His  neck  was  then 
bound  to  the  stake  by  a  rusty  chain.'  Two  bundles  of  fagots 
were  placed  under  his  feet  and,  mixed  with  straw  the  pile 
was  heaped  up  around  his  body  to  his  chin.  Addressing  his 
executioners,  he  said:  "The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  my  Redeemer, 
was  bound  with  a  harder  chain,  and  I,  a  miserable  sinner, 
am  not  afraid  to  bear  this  one,  bound  as  I  am  for  his  name's 
sake." 

Once  more  an  opportunity  was  given  him  to  recant,  this 
time  by  the  marshal  of  the  empire,  Happo  of  Poppenheim, 
and  the  count  palatine.  ''God  is  my  witness,"  Huss  replied, 
"that  the  things  charged  against  me  I  never  preached." 
And  then  he  repeated:  "In  the  same  truth  of  the  Gospel 
which  I  have  written,  taught  and  preached,  drawing  upon 
the  sayings  and  positions  of  the  holy  doctors,  I  am  ready  to 
die  to-day."  At  this  the  two  nobles  struck  their  hands  to- 
gether and  left. 

The  combustibles  were  then  lighted,  and  while  the  flames 
were  Hcking  up  around  the  helpless  body,  Huss  sang:  "Christe 
fill  Dei  vivi  miserere  meV^ — Christ,  thou  Son  of  the  living  God, 
have  mercy  upon  me.  And  as  he  reached  the  line,  ^^ qui  natus 
es  ex  Maria  Virgine" — who  art  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary — the 
flames  were  blown  by  the  wind  into  his  face.  Almost  stifled, 
he  still  was  able  to  articulate,  "Lord,  into  thy  hands  I  com- 

*  Ufrecht  brell — upright  board — as  Richental  puts  it.  He  also  speaks  of 
pitch  which  had  been  thrown  upon  the  straw  and  of  the  terrible  odor  given 
forth  by  the  carcass  of  the  burned  ass  after  the  fire  was  well  begun. 


258  JOHN  HUSS 

mend  my  spirit";  and,  moving  his  head  as  if  bidding  farewell 
and  in  prayer,  he  died,  as  the  faithful  Mladenowicz  writes, 
in  the  Lord — exspiravit  in  Domino. 

The  tradition  cannot  be  verified  that  to  an  old  woman  car- 
rying wood  to  the  stake  Huss  exclaimed:  "Oh,  simple  piety !" 
Luther  quotes  the  words  in  his  Preface  to  some  of  Huss's 
\  writings,  1537.  The  other  tradition,  that  Huss  said,  "To- 
'  day  you  are  burning  a  Goose,  but  out  of  my  ashes  will  be 
/  born  a  swan,  whom  you  will  not  burn,"^  was  not  a  prophecy 
spoken  by  him,  but  the  invention  of  a  later  time.  It  occurs 
several  times  in  Luther's  works  and  may  have  been  made  up 
in  part  from  Huss's  own  words  and  in  part  from  those  uttered 
by  Jerome,  "He  hoped,"  so  he  wrote  in  one  of  his  letters, 
"that  after  his  death  God  would  raise  up  braver  men  to  make 
bare  the  malice  of  antichrist  and  lose  their  lives  for  the  truth 
of  the  Lord  Jesus."  Jerome's  words  were — referring  to  him- 
self— that  the  council  had  condemned  him  falsely  and  un- 
justly, having  found  no  evil  in  him,  and  that  after  his  death 
he  would  return  to  trouble  the  consciences  of  its  members 
with  remorse.  He  cited  them  all  to  appear  after  one  hundred 
years  had  passed,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  most  high  God, 
the  final  Judge,  to  make  reply  to  him.^ 

When  the  executioners  pushed  down  what  remained  of 
the  body  held  by  the  chain,  another  load  of  wood  was  brought. 
The  skull  was  broken  with  sticks,  and  the  heart,  which  had 
been  thrust  through,  was  burned  to  ashes.  At  the  palatine's 
command   the  garments,^   held   by   executioners,   were   also 

^  Hodie  anserem  uritis  sed  ex  meis  cineribus  nascetur  cygnus  quern  non  as- 
sare  poteritis. 

^  Et  ego  post  mortem  meam  rclinquayn  in  conscicnlia  vestra  remorsum  et  cito  vos 
omnes  ut  respondeatis  mihi  coram  altissimo  et  justissimo  judice,  infra  centum 
annos.  See  Gieseler,  2  :  3,  pp.  4175^.;  Hefele  7  :  213;  Doc,  135,  also  39;  Man., 
2  :  526. 

'  Richental  states  that  they  consisted  of  two  good  coats  of  black  cloth,  a 
girdle  with  a  silver-gilt  clasp,  two  knives  in  the  sheath,  and  a  leather  scrip,  in 
which  "there  was  probably  some  money."  The  principal  accounts  of  the 
scenes  at  the  stake  are  by  this  author,  by  Mladenowicz  and  Barbatus.  Doc, 
3^3  sq.,  557  sq. 


BURNED  AT  THE  STAKE  259 

thrown  into  the  smouldering  flames  and  burned,  compensation 
being  promised  for  them.  The  ashes  were  then  gathered  up 
and  carried  in  a  wheelbarrow  to  the  Rhine  and  thrown  into 
the  river. 

In  accordance  with  the  count  palatine's  instructions,  not 
a  particle  was  left  of  the  body  or  garments  that  could  be  pre- 
served and  taken  back  to  Bohemia  to  be  used  as  a  relic.  But 
they  made  a  mistake.  What  was  infinitely  more  precious,  the 
martyr's  memory  and  example,  all  the  fires  of  Constance 
could  not  burn  up.  Huss  was  in  conflict  with  the  church, 
says  Flajshans  in. closing  his  Life  of  Huss,  but  did  not  know 
his  differences.  He  was  an  apostle  of  Christ,  who  preached  a 
pure  Hfe.  His  personality  teaches  us  that  in  matters  of  con- 
science it  is  not  only  best  to  be  obedient  to  God,  but,  what  is 
still  better,  he  hved  according  to  his  teachings,  even  to  dy- 
ing at  the  stake. 


CHAPTER  XI 

HUSS'S   PLACE   IN    HISTORY 

Perlulerimt  ambo  constanti  aninto  necem,  el  quasi  ad  epiilas  invitati 
ad  incendium  properarunt.  .  .  .  Ubi  ardere  cxperunl  hymnum  cecinere 
qtiem  vixflamma  etfragor  ignis  intercipere  potuil.  Nemo  philosophorum 
tarn  forti  animo  mortem  pertulisse  traditur  tit  isli  incendium. 

— ^neas  Sylvius:  Hisl.  Boh.,  chap.  XXXVI. 

With  a  steadfast  mind  both  bore  death  and,  as  if  invited  to  a  feast, 
so  they  hastened  to  the  stake.  When  they  began  to  burn,  they  sang 
a  hymn  which  the  flame  and  noise  of  the  fire  were  scarcely  able  to 
interrupt.  No  philosopher  was  ever  reported  to  have  borne  death 
with  so  brave  a  spirit  as  these  two  did  the  flames. 

John  Huss  was  burned  but  not  vanquished.  He  belongs 
to  the  history  of  his  own  people  as  a  patriot  identified  with 
one  of  the  most  active  periods  of  its  annals  and,  to  quote  the 
Bohemian  savant  Flajshans,  as  "our  greatest  and  most 
famous  theologian  of  the  fifteenth  century."^  He  has  a  place 
in  the  wider  history  of  his  age  for  the  conspicuous  part  he 
played  at  the  council  of  Constance,  so  that,  as  long  as  that 
assembly's  proceedings  continue  to  have  an  interest,  his  name 
will  excite  interest  and  his  career  be  studied.  And  he  has  a 
place  in  the  still  wider  history  of  modern  progress  as  a  pre- 
cursor of  the  Reformation  and  a  witness  in  favor  of  the  sacred 
rights  of  conscience. 
I  As  an  actor  among  his  own  people,  Huss  stands  forth  also 
A  as  its  most  notable  preacher  and  a  leader  without  equal  in 

'^  the  intellectual  Uf e  of  i^  university.  \  He  was  the  best-known 

and  the  best-beloved  priest  of  his  times  in  Bohemia.    We  have 

'  Super  IV  libb.  Sent.,  p.  iv,  unscres  grossten  und  beriihmiesten  Theologen, 
etc. 

260 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  261 

no  record  of  any  one  who  was  at  once  more  honored  at  the 
court  and  more  beloved  by  the  common  people.  He  was  a 
prolific  pamphleteer,  and  the  two  large  folio  volumes  of  twelve 
hundred  pages  with  double  columns  do  not  exhaust  his  Latin 
works,  not  to  speak  of  his  works  written  in  the  Bohemian. 
His  writings,  so  far  as  the  Western  reader  knows,  are  the  most 
stimulating  and  rich  that  the  Bohemian  literature  has  pro- 
duced. His  pen  was  adapted  not  merely  to  attract  the  popular 
hearing  in  a  time  of  controversy;  it  also  dropped  messages 
of  learning  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  the 
Lombard,  recently  discovered,  as  well  as  in  other  writings. 
In  his  espousal  of  the  cause  of  the  Czechs  as  against  the  Ger- 
mans, which  brought  upon  him  much  opposition  and  justified 
him,  as  he  thought,  in  fearing  death  at  the  hands  of  Ger- 
mans, he  was  in  the  right.  Prague  was  the  capital  of  the 
Czech  kingdom,  and  it  was  fitting  that  its  university,  no 
matter  what  the  old  charter  was,  should  be  controlled  by 
those  who  were  of  the  Czech  nationality.  Though  he  con- 
demned intermarriages  between  Czechs  and  Germans,  or  at 
least  demanded  that  the  children  of  such  marriages  speak 
Czech,  we  must  not  on  that  account  charge  him  with  bigotry. 
Did  he  not  also  say  that  he  preferred  a  good  German  to  a 
bad  Bohemian  ?  For  these  reasons  Huss  lives  on  in  the  hearts 
of  a  large  body  of  followers  and  also  Catholic  admirers  in  X' 
Bohemia.  ^  c:&>*S'  -  '"- 

For  centuries  his  name  was  treated  with  obloquy  by  the  Y\ 

population  of  his  native  land.  EjBforts  were  made  by  the 
Jesuits  to  entirely  blot  out  his  memory,  or,  at  least,  to  cover 
it  with  such  contumely  as  to  make  it  synonymous  with  ir- 
religion  and  the  subversion  of  the  true  interests  of  his  people. 
When  Palacky  published  his  History  of  Bohemia,  that  work 
was  subjected  to  rigid  investigation  by  the  censor,  and,  on 
account  of  references  supposed  to  condemn  the  religious 
authorities  with  whom  Huss  had  to  do,  parts  of  it  were  cut 
out.     The  modern  visitor  to  Prague  always  associates  the 


-U'.. 


262  JOHN  HUSS 

city  with  the  name  of  John  Nepomuk^  as  its  patron  saint. 
The  figure  of  this  saint  has  been  used  to  cast  Huss  into  the 
shadow,  and  Nepomuk's  history,  whether  wholly  matter  of 
legend  or  of  partial  truth,  has  been  employed  to  give  to  the 
saint  a  supreme  place  in  the  affections  of  the  Bohemians  as 
an  earthly  example  of  the  heavenly  virtues.  The  saint's 
real  name  was  John  Welfin  of  Pomuk,  a  city  sixty-five  miles 
southwest  of  Prague.  As  far  as  we  can  make  out,  a  man  of 
this  name  was,  in  1373,  connected  with  the  chancery  of  the 
archbishop  of  Prague;  after  his  ordination,  1378  or  1380,  was 
made  parish  priest  of  St.  Gallus,  and  from  1390  to  1393  was 
active  as  vicar-general  of  the  diocese.  He  is  said  to  have  been 
rich  and  to  have  made  loans.  In  1393,  according  to  the  later 
legend,  he  was  drowned  in  the  Moldau  into  which  he  had 
been  thrown  by  order  of  King  Wenzel  for  his  devotion  to 
John  of  Jenzenstein,  archbishop  of  Prague,  with  whom  Wen- 
zel had  a  quarrel.  Nearly  a  century  later,  he  was  reported  as 
having  been  the  confessor  of  Joanna,  Wenzel's  first  consort, 
and  it  was  for  his  refusal  to  reveal  the  secrets  of  the  confes- 
sional that  the  king  punished  him  with  death  after  having 
attempted  to  persuade  him  by  bribes.  John's  body  was 
reported  to  have  floated  on  the  surface  of  the  river,  which 
was  illuminated  by  lights.  In  1670,  Dlauhowesky  made  a 
romance  out  of  his  career,  which  he  pronounced  to  be  based 
on  old  manuscripts,  but  the  manuscripts  have  not  been  forth- 
coming. According  to  this  completed  legend,  all  Prague 
turned  out  to  see  the  lights  and  the  next  morning  the  body 
was  found  on  the  river  bank,  the  face  lit  up  with  a  heavenly 
lustre.  Against  the  king's  protest,  the  saint  was  buried  in 
the  cathedral,  but  the  propriety  of  the  entombment  was 
proved  not  only  by  a  treasure  of  gold  which  the  diggers 
struck,  but  by  a  heavenly  odor  that  proceeded  from  the 

^  For  Nepomuk,  see  A.  H.  Wratislaw:  Life,  Legend  and  Canonization  of 
St.  John  Nepomiicen,  1873.  Palacky,  Gesch.,  361  sq.;  Loesche  in  Herzog,  9  :  306- 
309;  Schmude:  Wetzer-Welte,  7  :  1726-1742. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  263 

corpse  and  the  cures  effected  upon  the  sick  who  touched  it. 
In  1729,  John  was  canonized  by  Benedict  XIII,  and  his  name 
is  celebrated  in  the  Breviary,  May  16.  One  of  the  difficulties 
in  the  legend  is  that  there  were  two  Johns  of  Pomuk,  the  one 
the  queen's  confessor,  who  died  1383,  and  the  other  the  vicar- 
general,  who  died  1393. 

The  Jesuits  of  the  counter-Reformation  period,  exerting 
themselves  to  blot  out  the  fame  of  Huss,  magnified  the  cult 
of  Nepomuk.  A  monument  on  the  old  bridge  over  the  Moldau, 
which  has  been  regarded  as  a  statue  of  the  saint  and  at  which 
people  still  worship,  is  now  looked  upon  as  a  monument 
erected  to  John  Huss.  Over  the  sanctity  of  John  Nepomuk, 
we  have  no  controversy,  but  we  are  interested  in  the  truth 
and  the  committal  of  Huss  to  his  proper  place  in  the  history 
of  his  people.  Nepomuk's  story  seems  to  be  largely  an  in- 
vention. However  that  may  be,  it  is  true  that  in  these  later 
years  a  new  interest  has  been  shown  among  the  Catholic 
population  of  Bohemia  in  Huss  as  a  Czech  patriot.  He 
certainly  deserves  the  friendly  consideration  of  his  people  on 
the  ground  of  his  patriotism  and  his  services  for  the  Czech 
language.^ 

The  prominent  place  which  Huss  occupies  in  the  con- 
temporary history  of  the  fourteenth  century  cannot  be  gain- 
said, no  matter  what  the  opinion  may  be  which  is  passed 
upon  his  career  and  his  fame.  To  say  the  least,  he  has  claimed 
as  frequent  treatment  from  biographers  as  have  the  names 
of  contemporary  popes  and  accredited  church  leaders  of  the 
fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries.  Na}',  he  has  claimed  far 
more  attention.  Neither  the  names  of  Gerson  nor  d'Ailly, 
eminent  though  these  churchmen  were,  nor  the  name  of 
Vincent  Ferrer,  the  e\angelist,  are  so  widely  known  and  pro- 

'  At  my  last  visit  in  St.  Vite's,  1913,  after  being  shown  by  the  verger  the 
tombs  of  St.  Wenceslaus  and  other  shrines,  I  said:  "Well,  why  haven't  you  a 
shrine  to  John  Huss?  He  was  a  famous  patriot."  "So  he  was,"  replied  our 
guide  most  good-naturedly,  "but  there  was  nothing  left  for  a  shrine.  His 
ashes  were  all  thrown  into  the  lake  of  Constance." 


264  JOHN  HUSS 

voke  so  real  an  interest.  The  Catholic  historian  and  reader 
cannot  pass  Huss  by  any  more  than  the  Protestant.  To  the 
Protestant  world  his  sufferings  and  death  stand  for  an  evan- 
gelical preacher  and  scholar  who,  for  the  sake  of  conscience, 
was  willing  to  suffer  and  to  die  a  violent  death. 

It  is  a  striking  fact  that  no  charges  were  brought  against 
Huss  touching  his  moral  character  during  his  life  in  the  city 
of  Prague,  or  at  Constance  during  his  trial  nor  yet  after  his 
death.  In  this  regard  his  memory  is  in  marked  contrast  to 
the  memories  of  three  of  the  greater  Reformers.  Charges 
were  brought  during  his  life  against  Calvin  by  his  enemies, 
touching  the  course  of  his  youth,  which  are  false.  Against 
John  Knox,  after  his  death,  false  charges  were  also  brought, 
which  Catholic  historians  now  pronounce  inventions.  But 
against  Luther's  purity  of  life  the  bitterest  attacks  are  still 
being  made  by  Catholic  controversialists  like  Denifle  and 
Grisar,  In  the  absence  of  any  trustworthy  testimonies  by 
contemporaries,  these  writers  draw  incriminating  conclusions 
from  Luther's  words,  not  allowing  for  the  fact  that  his  lan- 
guage was  often  exaggerated  and  that  those  who  knew  him 
best  testified  to  the  purity  of  his  life.  It  was  otherwise  with 
Huss.  No  charge  against  his  moral  conduct  was  ever  made 
by  his  enemies,  and  those  who  knew  him  from  day  to  day 
bore  strong  testimony  to  his  exemplary  character, 
y  The  charges  against  Huss  were  that  he  had  disobeyed  the 
V  discipline  of  the  church  and  rejected  sundry  of  its  doctrinal 
'j  tenets.  He  himself  died  assured  of  his  orthodoxy.  "Be 
confident,"  to  quote  again  what  he  wrote  to  the  university 
of  Prague  the  week  before  his  death,  ''I  have  not  revoked 
nor  abjured  a  single  article.  I  refuse  to  renounce  unless 
what  the  council  charged  against  me  shall  be  proved  false 
from  Scripture."  In  the  same  communication  he  stated  that 
with  his  whole  heart  he  professed  every  article  required  to  be 
believed.  For  two  years  he  had  looked  forward  to  the  pos- 
sibiHty  of  a  judicial  death,  and  from  the  earliest  period  of 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  265 

his  imprisonment  in  the  Dominican  friary  he  made  the  prayer 
that  he  might  never  recede  from  the  truth,  as  he  knew  it,  and 
begged  his  friends  to  intercede  with  God  to  give  him  con- 
stancy.^ We  have  no  heart  to  compare  Huss's  conduct,  per- 
sisted in  during  a  long  imprisonment,  with  Savonarola's,  who, 
under  torture,  made  recantations  he  afterward  recalled.  No 
man  ever  prayed  more  earnestly  or  studied  the  Scriptures 
more  intensely,  in  order  that  he  might  be  kept  from  yielding 
to  the  wrong,  than  did  Huss,  even  though  the  deliverance 
from  a  horrible  death  was  in  sight. ,) 

Are  these  two  things  compatible — Huss's  ignorance  that 
he  was  out  of  accord  with  the  canon  law  and  the  dogmatic 
belief  of  his  age  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  solemn  sentence 
pronounced  by  the  great  council  with  unanimity  declaring 
that  he  was  a  recreant  to  both?  Some  of  its  members,  as 
the  cardinal  of  Ostia  and  Zabarella,  were  eminent  canonists. 
Gerson  and  d'Ailly,  were  leading  theologians  of  the  century. 
Against  the  sentence  not  a  single  voice  of  dissent  was  raised. 
D'Ailly,  like  all  the  prelates  of  his  time,  fully  justified  Huss's 
condenmation  and  said  that  by  its  immense  abundance  of 
proof  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church  combated  the  pope's 
authority  and  plenary  power  no  less  than  the  Koran  combats 
the  Catholic  faith.  Gerson  said  that  he  worked  as  hard  as 
any  of  the  other  members  of  the  council  to  secure  the  con- 
viction of  Wychf  and  Huss.^  To  both  these  distinguished 
churchmen,  Wyclif  and  Huss  were  pernicious  heretics.  Huss's 
books,  were  full  of  statements  that  jostled  against  the  doc- 
trinal system  in  vogue  at  that  day.  The  council  was  of  the 
same  mind  as  Walter  Map  had  been,  who,  in  speaking  in 
the  third  Lateran  council,  1179,  of  the  condemnation  of  the 
Waldenses,  said:  ''If  we  admit  them,  then  we  ourselves 
ought  to  be  turned  out."    According  to  the  laws  and  usages 

1  Doc,  56,  91,  142. 

^  For  d'Ailly,  Gerson's  Works,  2  :  901.    Hardt,  6:16,  quoted  by  Tschackert, 
p.  234.     For  Gerson,  Dial.  ApoL,  DuPin's  ed.,  2  :  387.     Schwab,  600,  note  3. 


266  JOHN  HUSS 

of  the  church,  Huss  was  justly  a  heretic.  In  the  eyes  of  his 
theological  contemporaries  there  was  no  doubt  on  the  question. 
How  was  it  that  he  did  not  perceive  this?  The  explanation 
is  that  his  mind  was  so  wrought  upon  by  a  certain  class  of 
texts  of  Scripture  that  he  forgot  that,  in  order  to  be  a  heretic, 
it  was  only  necessary  to  combat  the  current  system  held 
by  the  church,  Scripture  or  no  Scripture.  Nay,  Huss  in- 
sisted that  his  views  were  in  accord  with  Augustine  and  other 
Fathers  and  also  in  accord  with  the  canon  law,  which  he 
often  quoted.  The  trouble  is  that  he  did  not  quote  everything. 
His  mind  failed  to  take  in  the  class  of  texts  and  quotations 
with  which  his  views  were,  or  seemed  to  be,  at  variance. 
Huss  believed  he  was  no  heretic,  but  he  soon  discovered 
he  was  out  of  accord  with  the  council,  and  he  seems  to  have 
been  of  the  opinion  that  some  of  his  smaller  treatises  contained 
matter  more  obnoxious  to  the  council  than  what  they  found 
in  the  Treatise  on  the  Church.  He  wrote  to  this  effect  to 
John  of  Chlum  and  was  glad  that  his  treatise  against  the 
Hidden  Adversary  had  not  been  brought  to  its  knowledge.^ 

Even  if  Augustine's  principle  had  been  followed  at  Con- 
stance, namely,  that  it  is  difficult  to  define  heresy  and  that 
the  spirit  in  which  an  error  is  held,  rather  than  the  error  itself, 
constitutes  heresy — yet  the  sentence  would  not  have  been 
otherwise.  Erasmus,  as  quoted  by  Luther,  must  be  taken 
with  allowance  when  he  said  that  John  Huss  was  burned  but 
he  was  not  convicted — exustum  quidem  sed  non  convidum 
esse}  The  principle  pursued  was  that  "by  our  laws  he  should 
die,"  and  the  council  understood  what  the  law  of  the  church 
and  of  church  procedure  in  its  day  was. 

Nor  is  the  position  well  taken  that  Huss  was  condemned 
for  disobedience  to  the  discipHne  of  the  church  alone.  Lechler, 
for  example,  declares  that  from  the  standpoint  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent,  he  was  not  convicted  of  any  heresy;  but  the 
sentiment  of  his  own  age,  and  not  the  symbol  of  the  six- 

'  Doc,  io8.  '  Luther's  letter,  Mon.,  i  :  Preface. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  267 

teenth  century,  was  the  standard  of  judgment.  Huss  prac- 
tically ignored  the  church  authorities.  He  refused  to  obey 
the  citation  to  Rome.  He  went  on  preaching  in  spite  of 
excommunication  and  interdict.  He  welcomed  a  general  coun- 
cil, and  yet  refused  to  obey  the  mandate  of  the  council 
to  recant  when  it  met.  The  priestly  vow  made  him  subject 
to  the  discipline  of  the  higher  court.  That  was  the  theory 
of  the  mediaeval  church,  and  the  higher  church  authority  sat 
upon  his  case  and  sentenced  him.  But  it  sentenced  him  not 
alone  for  contumacy  to  authority  but  for  doctrinal  aberration. 
Some  of  the  charges  were  erroneous,  as  the  charge  that  he 
held  to  the  remanence  of  the  bread  after  the  words  of  insti- 
tution; the  charge  that  he  had  made  himself  a  member  of 
the  Godhead  grotesque.  But  other  charges  certainly  were 
grossly  heretical  in  the  judgment  of  the  council  and  the 
churchmen  of  that  day.  The  death  sentence  was  inevitable 
and  Huss  started  out  for  Constance  prepared  to  have  such 
a  sentence  pronounced.  The  fault  was  not  with  the  judges 
but  with  the  system  and  the  sentiment  of  the  age.  Bishop 
Creighton  has  well  said:  "No  doubt  Huss's  Bohemian  foes 
did  their  best  to  ruin  him,  but  his  opinions  were  judged  by 
the  council  to  be  subversive  of  the  ecclesiastical  system,  and 
when  he  refused  to  submit  to  that  decision,  he  was  necessarily 
regarded  as  an  obstinate  heretic."  ^ 

The  question  whether  the  judgment  upon  Huss  might 
not  be  oflScially  reversed,  as  has  been  the  judgment  upon 
Joan  of  Arc,  was  opened  in  1869  by  Doctor  Kalousek,  a 
professor  in  the  university  of  Prague,  in  a  communication  ad- 
dressed to  the  Prague  press.  Doctor  Anton  Lenz  replied  that 
Huss  was  a  heretic,  and  the  sentence  could  not  be  changed. ^ 
A  difference  in  the  two  cases  is  that  Joan  was  condemned  by 
a  commission  of  bishops;  Huss  by  a  general  council.    It  may 

'  Lea,  Inquis.,  2  :  493,   and  Hefele,  7  :  214  sq.,   have  remarks  of   a  high 
order  on  the  council's  decision. 
2  See  Loserth,  282;  Liitzow,  288. 


268  JOHN  HUSS 

be  said,  however,  that  there  is  dispute  as  to  how  far  the 
decrees  of  the  council  of  Constance  are  to  be  regarded  as 
binding,  and  it  would  seem  that,  according  to  Martin  V's 
words  in  adjourning  it,  the  Roman  pontiff  has  the  right  of 
determining  the  value  of  each  of  these  decrees  by  itself.  Joan 
of  Arc,  in  1437,  was  also  declared  a  heretic  and  a  decayed  mem- 
ber, who  was  to  be  cut  ofif  lest  she  infect  the  other  members 
of  the  church.  At  any  rate,  we  wish  that  the  spirit  of  the 
court  of  Massachusetts  might  be  followed  when  it  expressed 
regret  for  its  judgment  upon  the  alleged  witches  of  Salem 
and  for  its  decree  banishing  Roger  WilHams,  and  the  spirit 
of  the  French  Protestants  who,  in  1903,  placed  the  expiatory 
tablet  on  the  stone  marking  the  place  of  Servetus's  death,  a 
tablet  whose  inscription  does  not  blame  Calvin,  but  disavows 
the  animus  of  persecution  in  this  age  for  Calvin's  followers. 
Papal  infallibility  or  no  infallibility,  it  would  make  greatly 
^  for  the  promotion  of  truth  and  good-will  if  the  Roman  pontiff 
a^  would  openly  disavow  the  spirit  of  our  spiritual  forefathers 

\/  that  condemned  Huss  to  death, 

"Aii    V  Huss's  views  were  the  right  views,  the  views  of  Scripture, 
'  the  views  that  must  be  held  by  those  who  take  the  position 
I  that  first  and  last  the  church  is  a  spiritual  institution,  that 
•  ^.|  its  doctrines  and  usages  must  be  in  accordance  with  the  law 
of  Christ  and  that  it  has  no  direct  or  indirect  authority  over 
i  a  man's  earthly  existence,  to  shorten  it  or  to  cut  if  off.    But 
;  this  was  not  the  view  of  the  fifteenth  century.;  The  ecclesias- 
tical government,  which  had  been  perfected  in  the  mediaeval 
age,  left  no  place  for  individual  opinion  or  the  discussion  as  to 
what  was  right  and  to  be  believed  between  a  council  and 
an  individual  accused  of  heresy.     It  is  not  surprising  that 
the  council  acted  unanimously,  but,  in  the  view  of  the  spirit 
of  free  inquiry  which  had  begun  to  show  itself  in  the  fourteenth 
and  fifteenth  centuries  and  in  the  light  of  subsequent  history, 
it  is  to  be  regretted  that  not  a  single  voice  was  raised  to  show  , 
sympathy  with  the  condemned  man's  fundamental  position/ 


\ 


/v 


4? 


0 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  269 

There  are  moments  during  his  trial  when  the  feeling 
arises  that  Huss  was  inclined  to  recede  from  the  plain  meaning 
of  what  he  had  written  and  perhaps  resort  to  technicalities 
of  language  in  the  attempt  to  parry  accusations.  This  feel- 
ing, however,  must  give  way  as  unjust  in  view  of  Huss's  con- 
stancy in  the  face  of  a  horrible  death,  maintained  through  a 
protracted  period,  and  the  evidences  of  sincere  piety  which 
are  evident  on  every  page  of  his  letters.  With  his  writings 
in  our  hands,  we  do  not  have  the  impression  that  his  meaning 
was  misunderstood.  On  the  contrary,  the  cardinal  of  Cambray 
was  justified  in  saying  that  the  formulated  accusations  were 
less  incriminating  than  the  orginal  text  of  the  writings.  In- 
deed, if  the  methods  of  the  inquisition  for  heresy  in  vogue 
at  that  time  are  held  in  mind,  the  council  dealt  leniently 
with  Huss.  After  Huss's  death,  the  claim  of  leniency  in 
his  treatment  was  made  by  the  council  itself.  It  applied 
no  torture  in  the  prison  cell — perhaps  for  the  very  good 
reason  that  torture  was  not  necessary.  Huss's  views  were 
plainly  set  forth  and  sufficient  to  convict,  and  the  council 
greatly  prolonged  the  time  of  respite,  giving  him  opportunity 
for  abjuration.  How  far  it  was  influenced  to  pursue  this 
course  by  regard  for  Sigismund,  we  do  not  know,  or  whether 
it  was  influenced  at  all  by  consideration  for  the  king. 

The  remark  made  by  Gerson,  after  the  council  had  ad- 
journed, deserves  to  be  repeated  for  the  implication  it  con- 
tains that,  after  all,  Huss's  execution  was  a  legal  mistake. 
The  Paris  rector  said  that  if  Huss,  whom  the  synod  con- 
demned and  pronounced  a  heretic,  had  had  an  attorney, 
he  would  certainly  not  have  been  convicted.  But  this  remark 
is  not  to  be  taken  seriously.  Gerson,  as  has  been  stated,  was 
in  a  huff  over  the  council's  refusal  to  condemn  the  proposi- 
tion that  a  vassal  who  agitates  against  his  king  may  be  law- 
fully murdered.  This  proposition,  carried  to  the  council  by 
Petit,  was  intended  to  justify  the  duke  of  Burgundy,  who  had 
murdered  his  cousin  and  rival,  the  duke  of  Orleans,  who  ex- 


A 


270  JOHN  HUSS 

ercised  undue  influence  over  his  brother,  Charles  VI,  king 

of  France.^ 
r  Huss's  primal  mistake  was  that  the  council  would  be  in 

i    /  a  frame  to  accept  from  his  lips  the  statement  of  truth  which 
i    !  he  found  vouched  for  in  the  Scriptures.     It  was  the  sharp 

L  criticism  of  yEneas  Sylvius  that  Huss  and  Jerome  went  to 
Constance  more  anxious  to  teach  than  to  be  taught — docendi 
quippe  quam  discendi  cupidiores — and  the  charge  is  made  that 
they  were  obstinate  in  not  hearkening  to  the  council.  All 
men  expose  themselves  to  this  charge  who  have  a  new  message 
and  insist  upon  their  message  in  the  face  01  constituted  au- 
thority. However,  the  council  cannot  be  condemned  for  not 
having  given  Huss  an  opportunity  to  freely  expound  his  views 
in  pubUc.  In  the  first  place,  it  was  not  customary  to  pur- 
sue that  course  with  suspected  heretics  and,  in  the  second, 
Huss's  written  statements  were  sufficient  evidence  against 
him.  Unequivocal  recantation  it  demanded,  but  only  after 
prolonged  investigation  based  upon  preferred  charges. 

If  we  compare  Luther's  course,  down  to  the  diet  of  Worms, 
with  the  course  of  Huss,  we  shall  find  much  that  is  interesting 
in  the  way  of  likeness  and  contrast.  The  views  which  Luther 
set  forth  in  the  XCV  Theses  in  regard  to  penance  and  the 
treasury  of  merit,  he  had  no  thought  of  as  being  out  of  accord 
with  the  church's  teachings.  So  it  was  with  Huss.  In  his 
first  statements  differing  from  the  traditional  system  of  belief, 
Luther  drew  only  from  the  fund  of  his  religious  experience 
and  the  Scriptures.  Huss,  on  the  other  hand,  drew  from  a 
predecessor,  Wyclif .  Luther,  though  threatened  with  excom- 
munication and  declared  an  outlaw  by  the  emperor,  not  only 
did  not  modify  his  views,  but  knowingly  departed  further 
r  and  further  away  from  the  traditional  system.  On  the  other 
\  hand,  Huss  seems  to  have  been  a  heretic,  as  has  been  said, 
L, without  knowing  it.  So  far  as  the  intellectual  denial  of 
the  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility  goes   and   the  authority 

^  Schwab,  Gerson,  609  sqq.    For  d'Ailly's  attitude,  Tschackert,  235  sq. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  271 

of  oecumenical  councils,  Huss  and  Luther  were  in  agreement. 
However,  in  the  matter  of  certain  practices  and  teachings, 
Huss  was  far  behind  Luther  and  Wyclif.  He  held  on  to  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  though  he  plainly  condemned 
the  withdrawal  of  the  cup  from  the  laity.  He  opposed  the 
sale  of  indulgences  announced  by  John  XXIII  and  rested 
his  case  wholly  with  Christ,  and  yet,  as  has  been  shown, 
he  did  not  abandon  the  doctrine  of  the  intercession  of 
saints  or,  so  far  as  we  know,  deny  the  value  of  genuine 
relics. 

But  in  the  former  case,  he  seems  at  one  time  in  his  career 
to  have  plainly  leaned  toward  a  modification  or  even  a  denial 
of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  Otherwise,  it  is  dif- 
ficult to  explain  the  persistence  of  the  charges.  For  example, 
in  an  interview  in  the  Dominican  friary  Palecz  insisted  that 
all  who  listened  to  Huss's  teaching  held  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
remanence  of  the  bread.  It  is  possible  that,  if  Huss  had  not 
been  checked  in  his  course,  he  would  have  proceeded  under 
Wyclif 's  influence  to  a  definite  repudiation  of  transubstantia- 
tion. With  great  emphasis  he  combated  the  current  opinion 
which  found  expression  in  such  words  as  these:  the  priest 
is  the  father  of  God,  the  creator  of  the  divine  body,  the  creator 
of  God, — expressions  derived  from  the  efficiency  of  the  priestly 
act  in  consecrating  the  bread  and  wine.^  In  his  Commentary 
on  the  Sentences  of  the  Lombard,  Huss  quotes  the  famous 
words  which  represent  Christ  as  partaking  of  his  own  body 
on  the  night  of  the  Lord's  Supper: 

Rex  sedet  in  coena  lurha  ductus  duodena; 
Se  tenet  in  manibus,  se  cibat  ipse  cibus. 

The  king  sits  in  the  midst  of  the  twelve; 
Himself  he  holds  in  his  hand.    He,  the  food,  partakes 
of  himself. 

*  Letters,  Doc,  29,  90,  Huss  insists  upon  the  same  denial  in  his  Com.  on 
the  Lombard's  Sentences,  pp.  572  sq.,  ntillus  creaius  est  creator  sui  creatoris: 
melius  sacerdos  creat  corpus  Christi. 


272  JOHN  HUSS 

But  he  declines  to  pronounce  a  judgment,  saying  some  accept 
and  some  deny  and  that,  so  far  as  a  final  judgment  was  con- 
cerned, he  committed  the  matter  to  Christ  who  chose  to  leave 
it  uncertain  for  him.  As  for  the  wine,  he  took  the  ground  in 
the  Commentary  that  it  was  not  to  be  distributed  to  laymen, 
inasmuch  as  Christ  was  wholly  in  each  element.^ 

It  has  been  said  that  Huss  died  for  his  attachment  to 
Wyclif  and  in  defense  of  his  memory.  This  is  true,  but  it  is 
only  a  part  of  the  truth.  The  two  men  were  closely  associated 
together  by  the  council  of  Constance  as  being  partakers  of 
heretical  opinions,  as  master  and  pupil.  When  in  1413 
Palecz  called  him  a  Wyclifist,  he  meant  that  he  "was  straying 
from  the  entire  faith  of  Christendom." ^  Huss  had  protested 
against  the  burning  of  WycHf's  books.  He  was  identified 
at  the  university  and  in  the  city  of  Prague  as  the  Oxford 
professor's  defender.  To  his  last  dying  breath  no  word 
escaped  his  mouth  in  the  least  discrediting  Wyclif.  He  did 
not  deny  that  he  wanted  to  be  where  Wyclif's  soul  was  and 
that  he  thought  it  to  be  among  the  saved. 

Invectives  flying  about  in  Constance  joined  their  names 
together.  The  missal  of  the  Wychfists,  as  it  was  called,  ran: 
"I  believe  in  Wyclif,  the  lord  of  hell  and  patron  of  Bohemia, 
and  in  Huss,  his  only  begotten  son,  our  nothing,  who  was 
conceived  by  the  spirit  of  Lucifer,  born  of  his  mother,  and 
made  incarnate  and  equal  to  Wyclif  .  .  .  ruling  at  the  time 
of  the  desolation  of  the  university  of  Prague,  at  the  time 
when  Bohemia  apostatized  from  the  faith,  who  for  us  heretics 
descended  into  hell  and  will  not  rise  again  from  the  dead  or 
have  life  eternal.  "^ 

The  heretical,  scandalous  and  seditious  teachings,  for 
which  the  council  of  Constance  sent  Huss  to  his  death,  did 

^  Super  IV.  Sent.,  557,  575. 

^  Doc,  56;  Buddensieg:  WicliJ  Patriot  and  Reformer,  p.  11,  says  that  "the 
whole  Hussite  movement  is  mere  Wyclifism."  Loserth,  p.  xvi:  "It  was  Wy- 
clif's doctrine  principally  for  which  Huss  yielded  up  his  life." 

^  Loserth,  pp.  348  sqq. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  273 

not  include  all  the  practices  and  dogmas  which  Wyclif  re- 
nounced. However,  they  were  sufficient,  if  entertained,  to 
shake  to  its  foundation  the  ecclesiastical  and  doctrinal  system 
accepted  in  his  day.  In  all  fundamental  positions  he  was 
in  agreement  with  the  English  teacher.  These  positions 
concern  the  nature  and  functions  of  the  church,  the  extent 
of  the  pope's  authority  and  his  infallibility,  the  immediate 
responsibility  of  the  individual  to  the  Scriptures,  and  the 
power  of  the  priesthood  in  the  sacrament  of  penance.  These 
are  most  fully  developed  in  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church. 
They  are  restated  in  his  two  writings  against  Palecz  and 
Stanislaus  of  Znaim,  who  had  attacked  the  views  set  forth 
in  that  treatise.  To  a  greater  or  less  degree  they  are  also 
touched  upon  in  his  treatises  against  the  eight  doctors  and 
on  indulgences,  and  some  of  them  are  stated  with  great  posi- 
tiveness  in  his  letters,  especially  those  addressed  to  Prachaticz 
in  the  year  1413.  The  Treatise  on  the  Church,  written  during 
his  period  of  semi-voluntary  exile  from  Prague,  was  prepared 
for  the  very  purpose  of  being  an  Apologia — a  self-defense — and 
was  considered  by  the  council  of  Constance  as  giving  the  most 
calm  and  deHberate  statement  of  his  views.  This  treatise  and 
the  two  defenses  against  Palecz  and  Znaim  occupy  one  hundred 
and  twenty- three  pages  of  his  works,  two  columns  to  a  page.'^ 
The  following  statement  will  set  forth  these  views  in  brief : 
"Jv— The-ehurch. — The  council  did  not  go  astray  in  making 
Huss's  definition  of  the  church  the  main  accusation.  That 
definition  struck  at  the  very  root  of  the  theory  of  the  mediasval 
church  which  the  council  had  inherited  and  accepted.  The 
treatments  of  the  Schoolmen,  based  upon  Augustine,  followed 
the  theory  that  the  church  is  a  visible  and  tangible  organiza- 
tion, as  visible  and  tangible  as  was  the  republic  of  Venice 
or  the  kingdom  of  France.    It  is  the  kingdom  of  the  faithful 

*  Moil.,  I  :  243-365.  For  references  to  the  Treatise  on  the  Church,  see  my 
trsl.  in  the  companion  volume.  The  few  references  given  here  are  for  the 
most  part  from  the  defenses  addressed  to  Palecz  and  Stanislaus. 


274  JOHN  HUSS 

who  have  the  mark  of  baptism  and  is  ruled  over  by  the  pope 
and  the  hierarchy.  This  ruUng  body  is  a  self-perpetuating 
aristocracy,  deriving  its  power  directly  from  God,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  pope,  or  by  consecration  and  election,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  bishops.  Pope  and  prelates  are  not  the  representa- 
tives of  the  Christian  commonwealth,  but  tjie  vicegerents  of 
God.  This  was  the  well-developed  and|^ccepted  theory, 
though  it  did  not  have  formal  statement  until  the  council  of 
Trent,  1560,  and  it  found  in  Cardinal  Bellarmin  its  chief 
defender  in  his  great  work  on  the  controversies  between  the 
Roman  Catholics  and  the  Protestants.  This  was  the  theory 
underlying  Boniface  VIII's  famous  bull  of  1302 — Unam  sane- 
tarn.  By  the  definition,  all  who  are  baptized  are  members  of 
the  church  and  heirs  of  divine  grace.  The  pope  is  an  essential 
factor  of  the  church,  so  that  where  he  is  not  recognized  and 
obeyed  the  church  is  not. 

On  the  other  hand,  Huss  defined  the  church  to  be  the 
totality  of  the  elect — universitas  predestinatorum — whether 
on  earth,  in  heaven  or  sleeping  in  purgatory;  or,  to  give  his 
fullest  definition,  "the  church  is  the  number  of  all  the  elect 
and  the  mystical  body  of  Christ,  whose  head  Christ  is;  and 
the  bride  of  Christ,  whom  of  his  great  love  he  redeemed  with 
his  own  blood. "^  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in 
Christ's  name,  there  he  is  in  the  midst  of  them.  That  is  the 
church.  It  is  one  thing  to  be  of  the  church  and  another  to 
be  in  the  church — aliud  est  de  ecdesia  aliud  in  ecclesia.  The 
antichrists  who  left  the  church  were  never  of  the  church, 
I  John  2  :  19.  Judas  was  in  the  church  and  not  of  it. 
The  prcesciti,  or  reprobate — that  is,  those  of  whom  God 
knows  beforehand  that  they  will  not  continue  in  a  state 
of  grace,  or  never  be  in  that  state— may  be  in  the  church,  but 
are  certainly  not  of  it.  This  is  taught  in  the  parable  of  the 
field,  with  its  wheat  and  tares,  and  the  parable  of  the  net 

1  Mon.,  de  Ecdesia,  i  :  245.  Ad  Palecz,  i  :  340.  In  his  super  IV.  Sent.,  616, 
Huss,  in  passing,  quotes  Augustine:  "the  church  is  the  body  of  the  elect  and 
justified  faithful." 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  275 

which  contained  different  sorts  of  fishes.    The  church  is  one, 
but  its  unity  is  one  of  predestination  unto  life.    She  is  one  by 
virtue  of  faith,  hope  and  love.^    Her  unity  does  not  depend 
upon  the  pope.    At  his  trial  at  Constance,  Huss  insisted,  as 
he  had  done  before,  that  it  was  only  by  accommodation  to 
the  popular  method  of  speech  that  the  church  is  called  the 
Lord's  thrashing-floor,  a  mixed  body  of  the  elect  and  repro- 
bate.   The  real  church  is  the  body  of  the  elect.    In  his  Reply 
to  Palecz,  he  elaborates  the  idea  and  declares  that  the  true 
Christians  in  India  or  Spain  or  Greece  are  integral  parts  of 
the  church,  though  they  may  form  particular  churches,  and 
they  are  united  and  one  in  Christ,  even  though  there  should 
,   be  three  or  four  popes.^ 
W  v    ^   The  church  is  the  house  of  God,  and  it  is  to  be  honored 
,^^     as  his  dwelling-place,  but  not  as  God  is  honored.     I  Cor. 
A      II  :  12  sq.    The  universal  church  has  but  one  head,  and  has 
/  /       always  had  but  one  head,  Christ.    He  has  always  been  with 
the  church  and  he  will  never  fail  to  be  with  the  church.     To 
the  passages  in  Paul's  epistles  which  speak  of  Christ  as  the 
head,  Huss  turned  again  and  again.     There  is  no  other  head 
of  the  church  but  Christ. 

This  definition  of  the  church  definitely  set  aside  several 
conceptions  which  were  currently  accepted  and  which  were 
regarded  as  fundamental  in  that  age. 

(i)  It  set  aside  the  theory,  widely  affirmed,  that  the  pope 
and  the  cardinals  constitute  the  church.  This  was  the  defini- 
tion given  by  Palecz  and  Stanislaus.  It  was  a  popular  view,  as 
Wyclif  shows  again  and  again  as  well  as  Huss,  not  only  in 
his  Treatise  on  the  Church,  but  also  in  his  letters.^  In  a  letter 
addressed  to  Prachaticz,  he  speaks  of  the  people  as  saying  that 
the  pope  is  the  head  of  the  Holy  Roman  Church  and  the  car- 
dinals its  body.  On  the  contrary,  he  declared  pope  and  car- 
dinals are  a  part  of  the  church  and  no  more.    They  cannot 

^  Mon.,  321,  326.  ^  Doc,  288;  Mon.,  i  :  325  sq. 

'Doc,  ST,  Mon.,  i  :  323,  335. 


276  JOHN  HUSS 

be  the  body  of  the  elect.  For  three  hundred  years  or  more 
after  Christ  there  were  no  cardinals,  and  if  the  church  could 
exist  and  get  along  well  without  them  then,  it  could  get  along 
without  them  always,  and  Christ  could  well  re-establish  the 
purity  of  the  primitive  church  without  cardinals  and  pope. 
If  the  pope  is  the  head  of  the  Roman  Church  and  the  cardinals 
the  body,  then  they  in  themselves  form  the  entire  Roman 
Church,  as  the  human  body  together  with  the  head  con- 
stitutes the  whole  man. 

(2)  It  sets  aside  the  idea  that  pope,  prelates  and  priests 
are  true  pope,  prelates  and  priests  by  virtue  of  their  office 
and  ordination  in  the  absence  of  purity  and  humility  of  life. 
Judas  had  the  office  and  the  ordination  of  an  apostle,  but  was 
not  a  true  apostle.  They  might  not  be  of  the  elect  and,  in 
that  case,  they  are  not  of  the  church.  Exactly  who  is  of  the 
elect,  and  so  of  the  church,  cannot  be  certainly  known  ex- 
cept by  revelation.  The  standard  by  which  we  must  judge 
pope,  prelates  and  priests  is  their  conduct  and  works.  "By 
their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  To  this  text  Huss  went 
back  again  and  again. 

(3)  Huss's  definition  set  aside  the  idea  that  church  govern- 
ment is  necessarily  bound  up  with  prelates  and  popes.  On 
the  contrary,  spiritual  authority  is  vested  in  the  church — 
the  body  of  the  elect.  The  Apostle  Peter  received  the  keys 
as  a  representative  of  the  church,  or,  to  use  Huss's  own  words: 
"The  church  received  the  keys  in  the  person  of  St.  Peter." 
All  the  Apostles  were  commissioned  equally  to  feed  and 
govern  the  church.  Thomas  went  to  India — not  by  Peter's 
appointment.  John  was  sent  equally  with  Peter  to  Samaria. 
James  presided  at  the  synod  of  Jerusalem.  The  thirteen 
Apostles  were  thirteen  prelates  or  princes — principes — in- 
vested with  equal  authority  in  all  the  earth.  So  are  their 
successors,  but  only  so  far  as  they  truly  follow  in  the  Apos- 
tles' steps  in  their  teachings  and  conduct.  To  the  church,  that 
is,  the  body  of  the  elect,  against  which  the  gates  of  hell  will 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  277 

not  prevail — to  it  discipline  was  committed,  Matt.  16  :  18, 
18  :  15.  Christ  enjoined  that  offenses  should  be  told  to  it. 
The  church  even  has  the  right  to  depose  popes.  In  his  Reply 
to  Stanislaus,  Huss  emphasized  over  again  that  the  power  of 
the  keys  was  intrusted  to  the  church,  that  is,  the  body  of 
the  elect. ^ 

(4)  Huss  nowhere  uses  the  terms  visible  and  invisible 
in  making  a  distinction  in  the  church,  as  the  Reformers  did 
after  him.^  Nevertheless,  he  sets  forth  the  same  idea  in  other 
language.  The  church  is  like  a  field,  containing  elect  and 
reprobate,  good  and  bad;  and  while  the  elect  alone  belong 
to  the  true  church,  yet,  inasmuch  as  we  cannot  tell  in  all  cases 
with  certainty  who  the  reprobate  are,  we  must  obey  the  church 
so  long  as  its  leaders  do  not  act  contrary  to  the  law  of  Christ, 
but  only  then.  The  church  itself,  as  a  visible  organization, 
may  be  a  harlot.^ 

In  principle  Huss  also  sinned  mortally  against  the  current 
idea  of  the  church  and  its  functions  when  he  permitted  lay- 
men to  intrude  upon  the  province  of  the  church  in  sequestrat- 
ing the  revenues  of  unworthy  priests  and  made  null  the 
interdict  and  other  church  censures  as  they  interrupted 
divine  rites  and  stopped  preaching.  Not  only  did  he  call 
upon  the  king  of  Bohemia  to  put  a  stop  to  simony  and  other 
clerical  offenses  by  the  use  of  the  civil  arm;  he  also  gave  the 
same  advice  to  the  king  of  Poland.  This  principle  that  lay- 
men have  the  right  to  interfere  to  correct  evil  church  practices, 
was  made  the  subject  of  one  of  Gerson's  articles  against  Huss, 
pronouncing  it  "an  error  most  pernicious  and  scandalous,  in- 

*  Man.,  I  :  352. 

"It  is  hard  to  understand  Wratislaw's  meaning,  page  210,  when  he  says: 
"  Huss's  definition  of  the  church  was  of  an  utterly  unpractical  nature,  es- 
pecially as  he  did  not  draw  any  clear  distinction  between  the  visible  and  the 
invisible  church,  to  the  latter  of  which  alone  his  definition  is  applicable."  The 
Reformers  could  not  make  a  clear  distinction  in  details  of  practice.  Schwane, 
Dogmen-gesch.  der  mittler.  Zeit.,  page  510.,  says  rightly:  "Huss  rejected  the  def- 
inition that  the  church  is  a  visible  community  of  believers." 

^  Doc,  55. 


278  JOHN  HUSS 

ducing  laymen — seculares — to  perpetrate  sacrilege,  and  sub- 
versive of  the  liberty  of  the  church."  ^ 

II.  The  pope. — In  regard  to  jurisdiction,  the  Roman 
pontiff  has  authority  over  the  particular  Roman  church, 
which  is  the  company  of  the  faithful  in  that  particular  com- 
munion, as  the  Antiochan  church  is  the  company  of  the  faith- 
ful under  the  bishop  of  Antioch.  The  church  is  both  universal 
and  particular  and  the  bull  of  Boniface — Unam  sanctam — 
was  wrong  in  representing  that  all  the  sheep  were  committed 
to  Peter's  care.  The  other  Apostles  were  equally  intrusted 
with  the  care  of  Christ's  flock. 

The  pope  is  not  the  rock  on  which  Christ  said  he  would 
build  his  church.  Matt.  i6  :  i8.  As  Augustine  in  his  Re- 
tractations had  said,  Christ  is  the  Rock.  He  is  the  founda- 
tion. ''Petra — the  Rock— said  to  Petro  Peter:  I  say  unto 
thee  that  thou  art  Peter — -that  is,  the  confessor  of  the  true 
Rock,  which  is  Christ — and  on  this  Petra — Rock — whom 
thou  hast  confessed — that  is,  upon  me,  I  will  through  strong 
faith  and  perfecting  grace  build  my  church." ^  The  founda- 
tion with  which  the  church  is  built  on  the  Rock  is  faith, 
faith  rooted  in  love.  That  Christ  is  the  Rock  is  plain  from 
Scripture.  Paul  and  Peter  call  him  the  foundation,  the  rock, 
the  corner-stone.  Likewise,  Christ  presented  himself  as  the 
foundation  which,  in  time  of  storm,  will  not  be  moved.  Our 
love  and  faith  are  placed  in  Christ,  not  in  Peter.  To  Christ, 
and  not  to  Peter,  did  the  prophets  look  forward.  Peter  did 
not  dare  to  assert  that  he  was  the  head  of  the  holy  Catholic 
church.  Christ  alone  is  the  head  of  the  body,  imparting 
life  and  sensation  to  its  members.  To  the  two  passages, 
Matt.  i6  :  i8  and  John  21  :  15,  which,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, are  emblazoned  on  the  base  of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's, 
Huss  devotes  elaborate  exposition. 

The  pope  is  fallible  and  may  be  a  reprobate  and  heretic — 
papa  falli  et  fallere  possunt.     This  is  proved  from  Scripture 

*  Doc,  31,  S2»  187.  ^  Mon.,  de  Ecclesia,  i  :  92.    Ad  Palecz,  i  :  321. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  279 

and  also  from  history.  Popes  of  human  appointment  were 
not  always  popes  by  Christ's  election.  A  pope  may  be  a 
successor  of  Judas  and  the  cardinals  in  the  line  of  Gehazi. 
Popes  may  be  mistaken  through  ignorance  and  avarice,  and 
make  mistakes  by  deception,  disciplinary  decrees  and  pre- 
cepts. Pontiffs  and  cardinals  at  variance  in  purpose  or  moral 
life  with  Christ  and  the  Apostles  are  thieves  and  robbers. 
In  his  Commentary  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  the  Lombard,  he 
said  distinctly  that  the  vicar  of  Christ  may  err  in  matters  of 
faith  and  disciphne.^ 

Constantine  II,  Liberius  the  Arian,  Boniface  VIII  and  Cle- 
ment V,  who  had  dared  to  order  the  angels  to  release  souls 
from  purgatory,  were  heretical  or  wicked  popes.  But  the  case 
above  all  cases  to  which  Huss  refers  is  the  case  of  the  female 
pope,  Joanna,  whose  natural  name  was  Agnes.  In  his  day, 
the  tradition  was  still  beheved  that  she  had  ruled  as  pope 
two  years  and  five  months  under  the  name  of  John  VIII. 
Her  sex  was  revealed  by  her  suddenly  giving  birth  to  a  child 
on  the  street.  Gerson  also  fully  believed  this  story  and  used 
it  also  to  illustrate  that  the  pope  may  err,  and  Agnes's  statue 
was  placed,  in  the  thirteenth  century,  in  the  cathedral  of 
Siena,  among  the  statues  of  the  other  popes.  The  story  is 
now  universally  discredited,  and  is  usually  explained  to  have 
been  a  parody  on  the  rule  of  loose  popes  under  the  influence 
of  dissolute  women  in  the  tenth  century.^ 

On  account  of  their  fallibility  and  in  view  of  the  fa,ci  that 
popes  have  been  heretics,  Huss  denied  that  they  are  always 
to  be  obeyed  or  their  censures  heeded.  Writing  to  Prachaticz, 
he  said:  "What  can  they  say  who  declare  that  the  Holy 
Roman  Church,  that  is,  the  pope  and  the  cardinals,  must  be 
obeyed  in  view  of  the  fact  that  Boniface — Boniface  IX — 
together  with  his  cardinals,  solemnly  declared  that  Wenzel  is 

^  Mon.,  I  :  324,  340,  350.  Omnis  vicarius  Christi  errare  potest  in  iis  qua 
concernnnl  fidem  d  claves  ecclesicE.     Super  IV.  Sent.,  p.  607. 

-  This  is  fully  set  forth  by  Dollinger,  Fables  of  the  Popes  in  the  M.  A.     See 
Mirbt,  p.  97;  MoH.,  i  :  323  sq.  339,  etc.;  Letters  in  Doc.,  58,  59,  etc. 


^ 


28o  JOHN  HUSS 

not  king  of  the  Romans  and  that  Sigismund  is  not  king  of 
Hungary?  This  with  them  is  an  article  of  faith  and  yet  they 
do  not  obey  Boniface's  decree."  Huss  also  uses  this  argument 
against  Palecz.  The  Roman  pontiff  is  to  be  obeyed  only  so 
far  as  his  decrees  are  in  accord  with  Christ's  law.^ 

As  for  the  citation  to  Rome,  he  had  disobeyed  it  because 
his  own  diocese  was  the  proper  place  for  his  case  to  be  in- 
vestigated, if  at  all.  By  his  long  absence  in  Rome  the  Word 
of  God  would  have  been  kept  from  the  people  in  Prague, 
and  the  way  of  citation  was  not  the  way  prescribed  by  Christ, 
as  is  shown  in  Matt.  i8  :  15.  "I  also,"  he  said,  "resisted  the 
bull  on  indulgences  sent  out  by  John  XXIII,  for  to  rebel 
against  an  erring  pope  is  to  obey  Christ."  As  for  the  interdict, 
it,  like  excommunication,  is  used  to  terrorize  and  enslave  the 
people.  The  pope  has  no  right  to  order  divine  services  stopped 
in  any  locality  simply  because  one  man  may  be  disobedient. 
Even  though  Judas  was  present,  Christ  went  on  distributing 
the  Last  Supper.  "I  was  excommunicated,"  Huss  deposes, 
"because  I  preached  Christ  and  was  seeking  to  turn  the  clergy 
to  a  life  conformed  to  God's  law."  Then  came  the  citation 
and  the  interdict.  Boniface  VIII  and  Clement  V  blasphe- 
mously make  every  rational  creature,  man  or  angel,  subject 
to  the  Roman  pontiff.  People  went  to  heaven  when  there 
were  no  popes.  They  went  to  heaven  during  the  rule  of 
Agnes,  and  they  have  continued  to  go  to  heaven  in  the  interims 
following  a  pope's  death  and  before  the  election  of  his  suc- 
cessor. But  in  all  times  Christ,  and  he  alone,  is  head  of  the 
church.  The  church  is  never  dead  or  without  a  head — mortua 
vel  decapitata, — for  Christ  lives  forevermore.  If  launched 
at  all,  excommunication  should  be  launched  for  mortal  sin, 
not  for  matters  neither  bad  nor  good  in  themselves.  In  fact, 
the  pope  was  not  necessary  to  the  church's  being,  or  even  its 
well-being,  and  if  popes  and  cardinals  both  were  destroyed, 
even  as  Sodom,  yet  the  holy  church  would  remain.^ 

^  Doc,  58,  60;  Mow.,  ad  Palecz,  i  :  329.  ^  Doc,  59. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  281 

Again,  all  such  titles  as  most  holy  should  be  given  up 
and  the  adoration  of  the  pope  and  the  pomp  with  which  he 
surrounds  himself  be  abandoned.  Worldly  power  was  given 
to  the  pope  by  Constantine  and  the  poison  of  Constantine's 
donation  continued  to  spend  itself.  A  reprobate  pope  should 
not  be  addressed  as  most  holy  father,  or  Judas  would  be 
justly  called  most  holy  bishop.^ 

In  his  letters,  Huss  approached  Luther  in  stigmatizing 
unworthy  popes  and  declared  the  Roman  hierarchy  the 
great  harlot,  the  blaspheming  congregation,  of  which  we  read 
in  the  Apocalypse.  The  pope  is  antichrist,  who,  under  the 
garb  of  sanctity,  conceals  the  abomination  of  the  beast.  He 
sits  in  the  place  of  honor  and  offers  himself  for  worship  to 
all  comers  as  though  he  were  God — quasi  sit  Deus.  And  the 
council  condemned  a  pope  as  a  simoniac,  heretic,  sodomite 
and  murderer! 2  To  be  sure,  these  words  had  reference  to 
John  XXIII,  but  the  council  regarded  him  as  true  pope. 

As  for  councils  and  their  authority,  it  must  not  be  for- 
gotten that  Huss  looked  forward  with  hope  to  a  council, 
though  he  appealed  to  Christ.  During  his  stay  in  Constance 
he  developed  a  definite  view  most  unfavorable  to  the  council 
convened  in  that  city.  As  has  been  quoted  before,  he  de- 
clared that  though  it  professed  to  be  a  most  holy  synod,  speak- 
ing by  the  Holy  Spirit  and  incapable  of  error,  yet  was  it  full 
of  the  wickedness  of  antichrist,  whose  foulness  deserved  to  be 
a  proverb  and  whose  fallibility,  shown  in  other  ways,  was  also 
shown  in  accepting  John  XXIII  as  pope,  kissing  his  feet  and 
addressing  him  as  most  holy  father. 

III.  The  priesthood. — Priests  in  mortal  sin  do  not  per- 
form the  sacraments  efi&ciently.  Here,  Huss  invalidates  the 
whole  theory  of  sacerdotal  power  received  through  ordination. 
Thomas  Aquinas's  theory  is  that  the  validity  of  the  sacrament 
does  not  depend  upon  the  priest's  character,  and  Leo  the  Great, 
450,  declared  that  even  in  an  unworthy  successor  the  dignity 
^  Mon.,  ad  Palecz,  i  :  322.  ^  Doc,  55,  135,  144, 


r 


282  JOHN  HUSS 

of  Peter  is  not  wanting.  Leo's  statement  Pastor  quotes  in 
vindication  of  his  treatment  of  Alexander  VI,  who,  in  spite  of 
his  flagrant  crimes,  yet  was  true  pope.  Following  Wyclif, 
Huss  also  stated  that  a  king  in  mortal  sin  has  no  right  to 
exercise  authority.  It  is  true  that,  at  his  trial,  Huss  seems 
to  have  modified  his  statement  by  declaring  that,  according 
to  the  law  of  merit — quoad  meritum — such  kings  or  priests  in 
mortal  sin  were  not  to  excercise  royal  or  priestly  authority, 
but  according  to  their  official  dignity — quoad  officium — they 
might.  But  the  council  laughed  him  down.  In  his  writings 
his  meaning  is  plain. 

The  absolution  of  sins,  therefore,  depends  upon  the  charac- 
ter of  the  priest.  Although  Huss  nowhere  declares  that  the 
priestly  act  in  absolving  from  sin  is  only  declaratory,  yet,  in 
effect,  he  makes  it  such.  A  priest  can  absolve  no  one  whom 
God  has  not  before  absolved,  and  all  absolutions  pronounced 
for  gifts  of  money  are  of  no  avail.  "Under  Agnes,  where  were 
the  keys?"  he  exclaims.  The  priest  has  no  arbitrary  right 
to  exercise  the  keys.  He  is  nothing  more  than  a  servant  or 
living  instrument.  He  must  exercise  the  right  properly  and 
have  a  good  motive  or  the  exercise  is  useless.^  And  as  for 
censures,  Christ  did  not  call  down  fire  from  heaven.  He  came 
to  heal,  not  to  destroy.  The  apostoHc  see  is  not  a  final  tribunal. 
How  can  it  be,  in  view  of  such  a  case  as  John  XII  who  was 
put  to  death  while  in  the  very  act  of  adultery.  Christ  is  the 
final  tribunal,  God  is  to  be  obeyed  rather  than  man. 

IV.  The  Scriptures.— Here  Huss  is,  on  all  occasions, 
emphatic.  He  followed  Wyclif  in  demanding  that  the  Scrip- 
tures should  be  in  the  hands  of  the  people  and  that  the  priest's 
first  duty  is  to  expound  their  teachings  to  all  men  alike.  They 
are  to  be  in  the  vernacular,  and  in  the  hands  of  all.  The 
Scriptures,  or  the  law  of  Christ,  as  he  liked  to  call  them,  are 
the  supreme  rule  of  opinion  and  conduct.  The  priest  and 
people  are  obhgated  to  follow  them  above  all  mandates  of 

^  Mon.,  I  :  352;  super  IV.  Sent.,  606,  616. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  283 

prelates  and  popes;  customs  instituted  by  the  church,  if  at 
variance  with  them,  are  of  no  value.  All  commands  are  to 
be  disobeyed  which  are  outside  the  express  authority  of 
Scripture — premier  expressam  autoritatem  Scriptura.  Yea, 
mandates  of  popes  and  cardinals  which  subvert  the  precepts 
of  Christ,  must  be  openly  resisted,  lest,  by  assent,  one  become 
partaker  of  crime.  In  matters  civil,  we  owe  obedience  to 
the  king,  in  matters  spiritual  to  God,  in  matters  ecclesiastical, 
which  involve  things  indifferent,  we  owe  obedience  only  as 
the  commands  are  in  accord  with  the  almighty  will  of  God. 
The  priest  must  continue  preaching  in  spite  of  a  papal  man- 
date to  the  contrary.  The  duty  is  laid  upon  him  in  ordination, 
and  a  mandate  to  stop  preaching  he  is  no  more  obligated 
to  obey  than  he  would  be  to  obey  a  command  forbidding  him 
to  give  alms. 

Huss's  works  are  full  of  quotations  from  the  Scriptures, 
as  are  also  his  letters.  At  his  trial  he  confidently  protested 
that  he  stood  by  the  Scriptures  and  that  he  must  be  informed 
out  of  them  before  he  would  retract.  To  the  charge  that  he 
followed  Wyclif,  he  repHed  that  he  accepted  WycUf's  state- 
ments not  because  they  were  made  by  Wyclif,  but  because 
they  were  drawn  from  the  Scriptures.  In  his  Reply  to  Palecz 
he  declared  that  he  hoped  at  the  bar  of  Christ  to  be  found  not 
to  have  denied  a  single  iota  of  them.^  Augustine's  view  was 
that  we  must  believe  the  Scriptures  because  the  church  tells 
us  to.  Huss's  position  was  that  we  must  believe  the  church 
in  proportion  as  it  follows  the  Scriptures. 

Huss,  without  formulating  it  into  a  definite  proposition, 
was  insisting  upon  the  individual's  right  to  interpret  the 
Scriptures  for  himself.  On  that  principle  he  stood,  a  single 
individual  against  the  council  which  represented  Christendom. 
''I  cannot,"  he  protested,  "offend  against  God  or  my  con- 
science by  abjuring."  The  Bible  was  his  guide,  the  Bible 
as  interpreted  according  to  its  plain  meaning.  This  idea  of 
^Mon.,  I  :  325,  330. 


284  JOHN  HUSS 

subjectivity,  as  Hefele  says,  the  council  could  not  tolerate, 
as  it  did  not  the  principle  of  the  sole  authority  of  the  Bible; 
and  Hefele  continues  that  ''in  these  respects  Huss  was  a  true 
precursor  of  the  Reformation."^  All  the  members  of  the 
council  recognized  the  wall  of  partition  between  him  and 
themselves  on  this  subject. 

Prierias,  the  Dominican  master  of  the  palace,  in  his  tract 
answering  Luther's  Theses,  stated  the  principle  anew  that 
the  Scriptures  derive  their  authority  from  the  church  and  the 
pope,  and  said,  "whoso  does  not  rest  upon  the  doctrine  of 
the  Roman  Church  and  the  Roman  pope  as  an  infallible  rule 
of  faith,  from  which  even  the  Holy  Scriptures  derive  their 
authority,  he  is  a  heretic."  With  Huss,  a  hundred  years 
before,  both  pope  and  council  were  hable  to  err.  The  Scrip- 
tures alone  are  infallible,  the  supreme  authority  for  human 
opinion  and  conduct. 

Huss  carried  the  Bible  with  him  to  Constance  and  to  the 
Dominican  prison.  Among  the  most  solemn  legacies  to  his 
disciple.  Master  Martin,  was  that  that  Martin  might  be  dili- 
gent to  read  the  Bible,  especially  the  New  Testament,  and  he 
urged  his  Bohemian  friends  to  listen  only  to  such  priests  as 
were  its  reverent  students.  Perhaps  his  last  written  words 
were  the  words  addressed  to  the  chaplain  of  Queen  Sophia 
and  other  priests,  to  be  diligent  students  of  God's  Word  and 
to  preach  the  Word  of  God — verhuni  Dei}  If  Tyndale  was 
strangled  at  Vilvorde  for  having  translated  the  Bible  into 
English,  then  it  is  also  true  that  Huss,  a  hundred  years 
earlier,  was  burned  at  Constance  for  his  devotion  to  that 
sacred  book. 

It  was  his  dissent  from  these  four  vital  doctrines,  the 
church,  the  pope,  the  power  of  the  keys  and  the  Scriptures, 
which  brought  Huss  to  his  death.    To  state  it  in  another  way, 

*  Rucksichtlich  dieser  beiden  principiellen  Punkte  ist  Huss  wahrer  Vorlaufer 
d.  Protestantismus,  7  :  217.    Comp.  Schwab,  Gerson,  600  sq. 
^  Doc,  117,  119,  148. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  285 

it  was  the  clash  on  the  subject  of  authority  in  matters  of 
religion,  whether  the  final  seat  of  authority  is  the  visible 
organization  called  the  church,  with  the  pope  at  its  head,  or 
the  Scriptures  as  interpreted  by  the  individual  invoking  the 
guidance  of  Christ. 

In  our  dealing  with  Huss's  case,  the  most  interesting^^ 
question  arises  whether — justified  as  was  the  council  accord- 
ing to  the  canons  of  the  age  in  putting  Huss  to  death — whether, 
after  all,  Huss  was  not  dealt  with  unfairly  by  Sigismund,  in 
view  of  the  promise  of  safe-conduct — salvus  condudus — that 
king  gave  him.  Bid  not  that  promise  afford  him  positive  as- 
surance of  safety  on  his  return  journey  to  Prague?  And  did 
not  the  king  break  his  word  when  he  executed  the  council's 
sentence  and  gave  Huss  over  to  the  flames?  Here  we  must 
be  guided  by  the  letter  of  the  safe-conduct  and  by  the  in- 
terpretation which  Huss,  the  king  and  others  put  upon  it. 

Sigismund's  salvus  condudus,  which  was  promised  to 
Huss  before  he  left  Prague,  ran  as  follows:  ^ 

Sigismund,  by  God's  grace,  Augustus,  King  of  the  Romans 
and  King  of  Hungary,  Dalmatia,  Croatia,  etc.,  to  all  and  every 
prince,  both  ecclesiastical  and  secular — dukes,  marquises,  counts, 
barons  ...  to  all  magistrates  and  officials  of  cities  and  villages 
and  to  all  the  rest  of  our  people,  subjects  of  the  Holy  Empire,  peace 
and  all  good.  The  honorable  master,  John  Huss,  bachelor  of 
sacred  theology  and  master  of  arts,  the  bearer  of  these  presents, 
journeying  from  the  realm  of  Bohemia  to  the  general  council  about 
to  convene  in  Constance,  whom  we  have  received  under  our  pro- 
tection and  the  protection  of  the  Holy  Empire — we,  with  full 
affection,  recommend  to  you  all,  desiring  that  you  receive  him 
kindly  and  treat  him  with  favor  and  that  you  will  help  him  in  all 
matters  to  speedily  prosecute  his  journey,  giving  him  security  by 
the  way,  whether  by  land  or  sea,  and  also  safety  to  his  servants, 
horses  and  baggage  and  that  all  tributes  and  other  restrictions 
whatsoever  may  be  removed  from  his  free  passage  over  all  roads, 

'  For  the  text,  Doc,  237;  Hardt,  4  :  522;  Hefele,  218.  The  discussions 
are  many,  among  the  best  being,  Hefele,  227  sqq.,  Wylie,  178-187,  and  Berger: 
Konig  Sig.  und  der  Concil. 


286  JOHN  HUSS 

through  all  gates  and  cities,  and  that  ye  permit  him  freely,  as  he 
chooses,  to  pass  along,  to  stop,  to  abide  and  to  return — transire, 
stare,  morari,  redire — and  so  provide  for  him  and  his  safe  and  secure 
passage. 

This  document  was  dated  at  Spires,  October  i8,  1414, 
and  reached  Constance,  November  5.  Huss  reached  Con- 
stance after  it  was  signed  by  the  king.  Its  language  is  specific 
and  provides  for  his  return.  Did  it  obligate  Sigismund  under 
all  circumstances  to  see  to  it  that  Huss  was  unimpeded  in 
returning  to  Prague? 

As  we  have  seen,  the  promise  of  safe-conduct  was  sent 
to  Huss  from  Italy,  and  Chlum  and  Duba  were  commissioned 
by  the  king  to  escort  him  to  Constance.  Repeatedly  in  his 
letters,  written  on  his  way  to  Constance  and  after  his  arrival, 
did  Huss  state  that  he  made  the  journey  and  entered  into 
the  city  without  the  safe-conduct.^  By  this  he  meant  without 
the  official  paper  which  Wenzel  of  Duba,  leaving  the  party 
at  Niirnberg,  had  gone  to  obtain  from  the  king.  In  making 
this  statement,  Huss  was  expressing  his  joy  at  being  treated  so 
well  and  getting  along  without  inconvenience,  though  charged 
with  being  a  heretic  and  though  he  had  not  yet  received  the 
promised  official  document.  Certainly  his  arrest  and  im- 
prisonment the  last  of  November  were  a  plain  violation  of 
this  pledge.  So  Chlum  and  Huss's  other  friends  in  Constance 
regarded  it,  and  so,  apparently,  did  John  XXIII.  So  the 
Bohemian  and  Moravian  nobles  interpreted  it  in  their  appeals 
demanding  his  release.  So  Sigismund  himself  felt,  who,  when 
he  was  apprised  of  Huss's  arrest,  sent  word  to  Constance 
that  he  should  be  released,  threatening  that  if  Huss  was  not 
released  he  would  on  his  arrival  in  the  city  break  down  the 
doors  of  Huss's  prison  and  let  the  prisoner  out.  Writing 
after  Huss's  death  to  the  Moravians  and  Bohemians,  March 
21,  1416,  Sigismund  declared  that,  if  Huss  had  journeyed  in 
his  company  to  Constance,  his  case  would  most  probably 

'  Doc,  76,  77,  79. 


HUSS'S   PLACE  IN  HISTORY  287 

have  turned  out  differently.  Exactly  what  Sigismund  meant 
by  this  statement  must  be  in  a  measure  uncertain.  It  was 
either  a  base  attempt  to  defend  himself  for  yielding  to  the 
council  or  an  announcement  of  his  helplessness  before  its 
sentence.  Base  it  was  because  Huss  made  the  journey  in 
the  way  laid  out  by  the  king,  in  company  with  the  deputy 
guards  the  king  had  commissioned;  unless  it  be  that  Huss 
made  a  technical  mistake  in  not  going  with  Wenzel  of  Duba 
to  meet  the  king  at  Spires,  an  interpretation  which  one  of  his 
statements  seems  to  be  capable  of. 

But  did  the  royal  salvus  condudus  give  Huss  the  right 
to  expect  that  Sigismund  would  shield  him  from  death  and 
protect  him  against  the  council's  sentence,  at  least  until 
after  he  had  returned  to  Bohemia?  The  witnesses  of  the 
case  are  as  follows: 

(i)  On  leaving  Prague  for  Constance,  Huss  seems  to 
have  put  his  case  unreservedly  in  the  hands  of  the  council. 
In  case  he  did  not  establish  his  orthodoxy,  he  expressed  him- 
self ready  to  suffer  the  penalty  meted  out  to  heretics.  Friends, 
taking  leave  of  him,  expressed  the  fear  that  he  would  not 
return  alive.  Huss  himself  left  his  will  which,  of  course,  was 
a  proper  precaution  under  any  circumstances.  But  in  a 
letter  written  to  his  friends  just  before  starting  out  on  his 
journey,  he  spoke  of  the  possibility  of  his  violent  death  at 
Constance,  and  that  he  was  wilhng  to  die,  if  by  his  death 
he  might  glorify  God.  From  all  this  it  would  seem  that  Huss 
did  not  claim  safe  return  except  in  the  case  of  his  acquittal 
at  Constance. 

(2)  Huss's  Bohemian  and  Moravian  friends  complained 
that  his  arrest  at  Constance  and  his  violent  treatment  were 
against  the  law  and  the  king's  solemn  promise  pubHcly  given. 
The  protest  of  the  two  hundred  and  fifty  nobles  demanded 
that  he  be  allowed  to  return  freely  to  Bohemia  and  asserted 
clearly  that  the  pledge  included  the  promise  of  safe  return. 

(3)  Mladenowicz,  in  his  account,  states  that  Sigismund's 


288  JOHN  HUSS 

promise  was  a  pledge  to  protect  Huss  on  the  way  to  Constance 
and  back — libere  ut  Constantiam  veniens  e  converso  redire  ad 
Bohcemiam. 

(4)  Henry  Lefl  and  others,  so  Huss  asserts,  assured  him 
that  the  king  had  pledged  himself  for  Huss's  safe  return  to 
Prague. 

(5)  During  the  period  of  his  imprisonment,  Huss  declared 
that  Sigismund  had  acted  treacherously  and  broken  his  word, 
that  he  ought  not  to  put  the  sentence  of  Constance  into  exe- 
cution and  ought  at  least  to  have  sent  him  back  to  Bohemia. 
Christ  deceived  no  man.  His  safe-conduct  could  be  relied 
on.^ 

(6)  There  were  some  at  Constance— how  many  we  do 
not  know — ^who  believed  that  Sigismund  had  broken  his 
promise.  This  is  evident  from  the  action  taken  in  the  council, 
September  23,  1415,  to  justify  Sigismund's  conduct. 

(7)  This  was  the  view  taken  by  Huss's  followers  after 
his  death,  and  in  1432  the  Bohemian  delegates  to  the  council 
of  Basel,  having  an  eye  to  Huss's  fate  and  the  alleged  de- 
ception passed  on  him,  demanded  a  distinct  insertion  of  a 
clause  pledging  them  safe  return.  One  hundred  and  six  years 
after  Huss's  death,  Luther  declared  faith  had  been  broken 
with  Huss,  and  he,  being  of  the  same  mind,  also  demanded 
an  express  stipulation  from  the  emperor,  Charles  V,  for  his 
safe  return  from  Worms.  He  said  that  even  a  promise  of 
safe-conduct  given  to  the  devil  must  be  kept,  much  more, 
then,  a  promise  to  a  heretic.^ 

(8)  As  for  Sigismund's  own  understanding  of  his  promise 
of  safe-conduct,  we  have  no  statement  written  by  him  before 
the  execution  of  the  death  sentence  or  after  it  on  which  we 
can  base  a  definite  opinion  except  the  letter  of  the  safe-con- 
duct, which  is  his  one  distinct  statement.  All  that  we  know 
besides  is  that  Sigismund  indignantly  resisted  Huss's  arrest 

^  Doc,  114,  143,  237,  535,  554. 

*  Kostlin,  Leben  Lidhers,  i  :  352.    Address  to  the  Germ.  Nobility,  5  :  24. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  289 

and  imprisonment,  when  he  first  heard  of  them,  as  a  violation 
of  his  promise,  and  that  after  Huss's  death,  he  wrote  to 
Bohemia  that  Huss  might  have  been  saved  if  he  had  waited 
to  go  v/ith  the  king  to  Constance.  The  last  mjist  be  deemed 
an  attempt  on  Sigismund's  part  to  excuse  himself. 

From  these  considerations  it  would  seem  that  Sigismund 
broke  his  pledge  and  Huss  was  foully  treated.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  argued,  and  with  plausibility,  that  Sigismund 
gave  his  pledge  for  Huss's  safe  return  on  condition  that  Huss 
would  be  cleared.  It  is  hardly  to  be  imagined  that  Sigismund 
was  unaware  of  the  custom  of  the  age — that  on  the  question 
of  heresy  the  ecclesiastical  sentence  was  final,  that  heretics 
had  no  rights  before  man  or  God,  and  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
the  civil  arm  to  punish  them  with  death.  Ferdinand,  king 
of  Aragon,  as  we  have  seen,  urged  Sigismund  to  kill  Huss 
forthwith.  The  council  in  its  decree  of  September  23,  scarcely 
two  months  after  Huss's  death,  took  the  ground  that  no 
salvus  conductus  given  by  emperor  or  other  prince  to  a  heretic, 
or  one  suspected  of  heresy,  had  any  validity  whatsoever, 
seeing  it  was  to  the  prejudice  of  the  jurisdiction  exercised 
by  the  church;  nor  could  such  a  pledge  put  any  hinderance 
in  the  way  of  the  church  in  the  exercise  of  its  authority. 
Moreover,  the  person  who  gave  such  pledge  of  safe-conduct 
was  under  no  obhgation  to  keep  the  pledge.  The  principle 
was  also  stated  in  distinct  words  by  the  council  that  a  con- 
firmed heretic  by  his  heresy  placed  himself  outside  the  pro- 
tection of  all  safe-conducts,  and  that  no  promise  or  faith  is 
to  be  kept  with  him  according  to  any  law,  natural,  divine 
or  human,  which  shall  be  to  the  prejudice  of  the  Catholic 
faith.i  This  means  that  faith  is  not  to  be  kept  with  a 
heretic. 

*  Nee  aliqua  sibi  fides  aid  promissio  de  jure  nalurali,  divino  vel  humano,  in 
prcEJudiciiim  catholiccB  fidei  observanda.  Mirbl,  p.  170.  There  are  two  forms 
or  two  parts  given  of  the  council's  decree.  The  first,  by  Mansi,  7  :  779,  the 
second  by  Van  der  Hardt,  4  :  521;  the  latter  taken  from  a  single  manuscript 
in  Vienna,  but  of  exceptional  weight,  being  written  by  the  hand  of  one  who  had 


290  JOHN  HUSS 

That  Sigismund,  as  a  king  and  as  emperor,  could  have 
asserted  his  royal  word  in  resisting  the  council,  there  can  be 
no  doubt.  So  John  of  Gaunt,  in  the  absence  of  any  official 
promise  of  protection,  protected  Wyclif  in  the  face  of  the 
Earthquake  council.  That,  from  the  moment  of  his  arrival  in 
Constance,  Sigismund  became  more  and  more  subservient  to 
the  council  has  been  shown.  Little  did  he  protect  Huss  after 
he  reached  the  city,  on  Christmas  Eve.  John  XXIII  was  a 
better  friend  to  him  than  the  king.  John  at  least  provided 
Huss  with  decent  food  and  humane  guards.  Sigismund,  it  is 
true,  affirmed  on  June  8  that  he  had  fulfilled  his  pledge  to 
see  to  it  that  Huss  had  a  fair  pubHc  hearing.  He,  no  doubt, 
suppressed  any  scruples  he  may  have  felt  on  the  ground  that 
the  council's  will,  after  all,  was  supreme  and  that  it  was  no 
perjury  to  disregard  a  promise  to  a  heretic  when  he  was 
following  the  church's  behest.  This  was  the  very  plea  to 
which  Huss  steadfastly  refused  to  give  way  when  he  was 

i      called  upon  to  recant.     Huss  was  governed  by  conscience, 

1     Sigismund  by  rules  of  prudence. 

'  It  is  probable  the  council  would  have  broken  with  the 
'king,  if  he  had  kept  the  letter  of  his  pledge.  His  imperial 
good  faith  probably  was  no  more  at  stake  than  the  council's 

I  very  existence.  As  it  was,  in  yielding  to  the  council  Sigismund 
lost  with  the  Bohemian  people.    They  felt  deeply  that  it  was 

.  a  national  disgrace  that  he  had  yielded  to  the  council's  sen- 
tence. When  Sigismund  wanted  to  drive  away  the  envoy 
from  Milan,  who  had  come  to  Constance  with  a  safe-conduct, 
the  council  put  itself  in  the  way,  declaring  that  all  having 
a  safe-conduct  had  the  right  to  stay  and  go;  but  the  envoy 
was  not  a  heretic.    At  the  very  least,  Sigismund  should  have 

been  at  the  council.  Hefele,  7  :  227,  237,  disputes  the  second  and  explains  it 
as  being  a  note  of  some  member  of  the  council  which  he  intended  to  propose 
for  its  action,  but  did  not.  It  contains  express  references  to  Sigismund's  own 
case  as  having  broken  his  pledge  to  Huss.  This  personal  reference  seems  to  be 
in  favor  of  the  genuineness  of  the  second  part  of  the  official  decree,  which  is 
represented  above  in  the  clause  beginning  with  the  words  "the  principle." 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  291 

sent  Huss  back  to  Bohemia.^  It  was,  as  a  Protestant  his- 
torian, Karl  Muller,  has  said,  simply  a  question  of  power 
between  Sigismund  and  the  council  as  to  whether  Sigismund 
was  to  keep  his  promise  or  not.^  The  king  put  aside  the 
promises  which  he  had  made  to  induce  Huss  to  go  to  Con- 
stance. 

Atrocious  as  the  principle  is  that  faith  is  not  to  be  kept 
with  a  heretic,  it  was  the  principle  upon  which  Sigismund  and 
the  council  acted  and  the  council  defined.  The  Spanish  king, 
Ferdinand,  knew  well  the  methods  of  the  papal  inquisition 
when  he  stated  that  it  is  not  breaking  faith  to  break  faith 
with  a  man  who  breaks  his  faith  with  God — non  est  Jrangere 
fidem  ei  qui  Deo  fidem  frangit. 

Considering  the  centuries  which  have  elapsed  since  141 5, 
we  may  distinctly  trace  Huss's  influence  in  the  history  of  the 
Protestant  Reformation.  The  great  statue  at  Worms,  de- 
signed to  commemorate  the  Reformation,  rightly  gives  places 
to  Wyclif,  Huss  and  Savonarola  as  forerunners  of  that  relig- 
ious movement.  By  WycHf,  Luther  was  not  directly  in- 
fluenced. The  Reformer  made  no  reference  to  Wyclif's 
writings.  Savonarola  influenced  him  to  some  extent  and 
Luther  edited  the  MedUations  on  the  XXXII  and  LI  Psalms 
which  Savonarola  prepared  in  prison.    He  knew,  he  said,  that 

'  According  to  Doctor  Lenz,  quoted  by  Liitzow,  p.  290,  Sigismund  broke 
his  word  by  not  delivering  Huss  over  to  Wenzel. 

-  Kirchengesch.,  2  :  80.  Berger  holds  that  Sigismund  had  no  right  to  give 
a  safe-conduct  to  one  suspected  of  heresy  and  could  not  have  intended  to 
give  him  such  a  clear  paper,  pp.  109  sqq.,  173  sq.  However,  he  had  "without 
doubt  the  power  and  the  right  to  at  least  postpone  the  execution  of  the  sen- 
tence by  the  civil  arm."  Palacky,  Gesch.,$  :  i,  p.  357,  also  holds  that  Sigis- 
mund had  no  right  to  give  to  such  a  person  an  unconditional  safe-conduct, 
which  was  void  by  the  law  of  the  age.  Lea,  Inquisition,  2  :  462  sqq.,  contro- 
verts Berger's  position.  Sigismund  was  too  well  versed  in  the  principles  of 
canon  law  in  regard  to  heretics  not  to  have  understood  what  he  was  doing  when 
he  gave  a  salvus  conduclus  promising  Huss  safe  return.  Berger,  pp.  178  sqq., 
gives  thirty-nine  letters  of  safe-conduct,  including  Charles  V's  letter  to  Luther, 
1521.  Karl  Muller,  Hist.  Vierteljahrsschr.,  1898,  pp.  41  sqq.,  and  F.  Bartos  of 
Prague  in  Ztschr.  d.  Kirchengesch.,  August,  1913,  34  :  414  sq.,  bring  new 
material  to  show  that  a  promise  to  return  was  deemed  sacred. 


292  JOHN  HUSS 

the  Dominican  preacher  had  much  of  the  clay  of  human 
theology  clinging  to  him,  but  in  these  Meditations  a  true 
Christian  was  speaking  and  he  deserved  \o  be  canonized  in 
spite  of  antichrist,  who  sought  to  blot  out  his  memory. 

To  Huss's  direct  influence,  Luther  bears  generous  and 
repeated  witness,  not  only  in  his  three  prefaces  to  the  three 
editions  of  some  of  Huss's  epistles  and  other  works  issued  at 
Wittenberg,  1536  and  1537,'  but  also  in  other  places.  Nean- 
der,  Lechler,  Ullmann  and  others  make  Huss  a  precursor  of 
Luther.  Harnack  takes  another  view  when  he  says:  "The 
Wyclifite  and  Hussite  movement  must  be  taken  as  the  ripest 
fruitage  of  the  reform  movement  of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  al- 
though it  loosened  the  ground  and  prepared  the  way,  yet  it 
brought  to  expression  no  reformatory  ideas."  ^  We  take  the 
former  ground,  not  only  because  Huss  actually  furnishes  a 
good  deal  of  the  essence  of  the  Reformation  in  his  statements 
on  the  church,  the  pope  and  the  Scriptures,  but  because  of  the 
debt  Luther  distinctly  acknowledged  to  him. 

As  a  student  at  Erfurt,  Luther  had  in  his  hands  Huss's 
sermons.  He  tells  us  that  he  was  influenced  by  curiosity  to 
discover  what  sort  of  teachings  the  heretic  had  sown.  To 
his  amazement,  he  was  moved  with  admiration  and,  at  the 
same  time,  was  filled  with  surprise  that  a  man  who  preached 
so  evangeHcally  and  was  so  apt  and  so  serious  in  expounding 
the  Scriptures  should  have  been  burned  as  a  heretic.  "So 
abominated,"  he  says,  speaking  of  the  sixteenth  century,  "was 
Huss's  very  name  that  the  sun  itself,  it  was  thought,  would 
have  been  obscured  if  it  had  been  mentioned  with  honor." 
The  apparent  contradiction  between  these  sermons  and 
Huss's  heresy  he  could  only  explain  on  the  assumption  that 
the  sermons  were  preached  before  Huss  became  a  heretic. 

Soon  after  Luther's  Reformatory  activity  began,  he  was 

'  Printed  on  the  first  pages  of  the  large  ed.  of  Huss's  works. 

^  Dogmengesch.,  3  :  413.  Gottschick:  Huss's  Lehre  von  der  Kirche,  Ztsch.f. 
Kirchengesch.,  8  :  364,  says  that  Huss  had  no  other  view  of  salvation  than 
the  one  current  in  his  age. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  293 

accused  by  Eck  at  the  Leipzig  disputation,  15 19,  with  being 
a  Hussite.  Eck  had  mentioned  articles  of  Wychf  and  Huss 
condemned  at  Constance,  such  as  that  faith  in  the  pope  was 
not  necessary  to  salvation  and  that  the  church  on  earth  does 
not  require  a  single  head.  This  skilled  disputant  then  went 
on  to  allege  a  rumor  that  Luther  was  quite  favorable  to  the 
Bohemians.  Pressed  to  the  wall,  Luther  replied  that  among 
the  Bohemian  articles  there  were  many  which  were  both 
Christian  and  Scriptural.  It  was  a  matter  of  indifference  to 
him  that  Wychf  and  Huss  advocated  the  articles,  they  should 
no  longer  be  condemned.  Of  Christians,  no  article  should  be 
required  which  was  not  Scriptural.  Quick  to  take  advantage 
of  these  admissions,  Eck  declared  that  it  was  after  the  manner 
of  the  Bohemians  to  presume  to  know  the  Scriptures  better 
than  the  pope,  councils,  doctors  and  universities.  The  con- 
demned Bohemians  would  thereafter  look  upon  Luther  as 
their  advocate.  In  this  way,  Luther  was  forced  to  take 
pubHcly  a  position  in  advance  of  his  previous  position  and 
solemnly  declare  that  general  councils,  as  well  as  popes,  were 
not  infalHble.^ 

It  was  soon  after  this  disputation  that  Luther  received 
letters  from  Hussites  of  the  Utraquist  wing,  John  Poduschka 
and  Wenzel  Rosdolowsky,  who  expressed  their  best  wishes 
and  accompanied  their  letter  with  a  gift  of  knives  and  a  copy 
of  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church.  The  former  said  that  what 
Huss  had  been  in  Bohemia,  that  Luther  was  in  Saxony. 
Luther  acknowledged  these  communications  and  sent  his  cor- 
respondents a  copy  of  his  smaller  writings.  The  good,  or- 
thodox opinion  of  Huss  in  Germany  was  expressed  by  a  con- 
temporary, Cochlasus,  who  pronounced  Huss  worse  than  a 
Jew — a  Tartar,  a  Turk  and  a  Sodomite.  But  the  influence 
of  the  Bohemian  had  gone  so  far  with  Luther  in  1520,  that, 
with  reference  to  those  who  yoked  their  names  together,  he 
asserted  that,  without  surmising  it,  he  had  been  advocating  all 

'  Kustlin,  I  :  265  sq. 


294  JOHN  HUSS 

Huss's  teachings  and  he  and  his  associates  were  all  Hussites 
without  knowing  it.  He  was  amazed  that  evangelical  truth 
had  been  publicly  consigned  to  the  flames  a  hundred  years 
before,  and  yet,  alas,  no  one  dared  openly  to  acknowledge 
that  this  was  the  case. 

In  1520  a  Latin  edition  of  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church 
appeared  in  Wittenberg.  In  his  address  to  the  German 
nobility,  written  the  same  year,  Luther  called  upon  the 
Roman  Church  to  confess  that  it  had  done  wrong  in  burning 
Huss.  He  was  burned  unjustly  and  in  violation  of  God's 
commandments;  that  innocent  man's  blood,  he  asserted,  was 
still  crying  from  the  ground.  A  year  later  he  revoked  his 
statement  that  some  of  Huss's  articles  condemned  at  Con- 
stance were  true.  He  now  affirmed  that  they  were  all  true, 
and  that  the  pope  and  papists,  in  condemning  Huss  at  Con- 
stance, had  also  condemned  the  Gospel,  and  in  its  place  put 
the  doctrines  of  the  dragon  of  hell.^  From  that  time  on, 
Luther  was  an  uncompromising  champion  of  Huss  as  a  man 
of  God.  In  his  prefaces  to  Huss's  letters  and  writings, 
already  referred  to,  he  fully  expressed  this  opinion.  In  one 
of  these,  characteristically  calHng  the  Roman  bishop  that 
"basilisk  of  the  church  and  plague  of  all  the  earth,"  he 
accuses  the  pope  of  being  the  creator  of  new  gods  by  canon- 
izing the  saints,  while  at  the  same  time  he  damned  that  good 
and  most  pious  man,  John  Huss,  and  ordered  the  whole  world 
to  execrate  him  as  a  devil  to  be  abhorred  through  eternity. 
In  effect,  he  set  himself  up  as  the  judge  of  the  Uving  and 
the  dead  by  damning  the  one  and  ordering  new  saints  to  be 
invoked  and  worshipped. 

In  the  second  preface,  he  speaks  of  Huss  as  the  church's 
holy  martyr  and  pronounced  the  council  of  Constance  as  hav- 
ing exposed  itself  to  derision  and  ridicule  for  raving  against 
that  pious  man,  and  he  prayed  that  the  next  council  to  be 

'  To  the  Germ.  Nobility,  5  :  23.  Grund  und  Ursach  alter  Arlikel.  Kostlin, 
I  :  408. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  295 

held  might,  by  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  seek  the  glory  of 
God  and  that  alone.  In  the  third,  Luther  says  that  every 
one  of  a  sane  mind  will  confess  that  John  Huss  was  adorned 
with  great  and  excellent  gifts  from  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  was 
as  a  sheep  among  lions  and  wolves  and,  if  Huss  is  to  be  re- 
garded as  a  heretic,  then  scarcely  one  of  all  those  upon  whom 
the  sun  has  ever  looked  down  can  truly  be  held  to  have 
been  a  Christian.  For  John  Huss  committed  no  greater 
crime  than  to  assert  that  a  Roman  pope  of  impious  hfe  is 
not  the  head  of  the  Catholic  church.  "If  he,  who,  in  the 
agony  of  death,  invoked  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God,  who  suffered 
on  our  behalf,  and  gave  himself  up  to  the  flames  with  such 
faith  and  constancy  for  Christ's  cause — if  he  did  not  show 
himself  a  brave  and  worthy  martyr  of  Christ — then  may 
scarcely  any  one  be  saved." 

Luther  and  the  other  Reformers  gave  permanency  to  a 
body  of  opinions  which  Huss  held,  but  went  much  further 
than  their  predecessor.  The  Bohemian  reformer  was  out  of 
accord  with  the  church  of  his  time,  though  he  did  not  know  it. 
So  was  Luther  when  he  nailed  up  the  XCV  Theses,  and  as  he 
himself  says,  in  speaking  of  Huss.  More  than  a  century  was 
to  elapse  after  Huss's  death  before  the  hour  for  the  Protestant 
movement  struck.  In  the  meantime,  the  way  had  been 
further  prepared  for  it  by  the  invention  of  printing,  the  spread 
of  Humanism  in  Germany,  and  the  pubHcation  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament.  In  Huss's  views  we  have  only  a  ghmmer 
of  what  was  to  come,  however  a  bright  ghmmer.  Luther 
would  no  doubt  have  been,  if  Huss  had  not  hved,  but  it  is 
no  derogation  of  Luther's  better  equipment,  his  originality 
and  his  great  services  to  accord  to  Huss  the  merit  of  having 
spoken  so  bravely  and  clearly  on  the  papacy,  the  Scripture 
and  other  matters. 

The  relation  in  which,  on  the  one  hand,  Huss  stood  to 
WycHf,  and  on  the  other  to  the  Reformation  is  well  illus- 
trated in  a  Hussite  cantionale,  dated  1572,  in  the  possession 


\j" 


296  JOHN  HUSS 

of  the  university  of  Prague.  It  is  written  on  parchment  and 
contains  the  coats  of  arms  of  many  Bohemian  nobles. 
Three  medalUons,  with  which  one  of  its  pages  is  illuminated, 
represent  Wyclif  striking  fire  with  two  flints,  Huss  starting 
a  flame  and  Luther  holding  aloft  the  burning  torch.  A  pic- 
ture at  the  foot  of  the  page  represents  Huss  in  the  midst  of 
the  flames  at  Constance. 

Over  against  this  old  Hussite  song-book  is  to  be  set  one 
of  the  bronze  pieces  of  statuary,  erected  in  front  of  the  uni- 
versity in  1848  to  commemorate  the  five-hundredth  anniver- 
sary of  Charles  IV  and  representing  the  faculty  of  theology. 
Huss  has  no  place  there— the  most  notable  figure,  so  far  as 
the  outside  world  knows,  ever  connected  with  the  university. 
The  group  represents  a  woman  with  her  right  hand  on  a 
book  labelled  the  Bible  and  on  her  left  knee  a  volume  labelled 
Thomas  Aquinas.  The  Bible  is  closed,  the  work  of  the  School- 
man is  wide  open.  The  controversy  in  Bohemia  still  goes  on 
between  Huss,  who  advocated  the  open  Bible,  and  the  ecclesi- 
astical tradition  which  keeps  the  Bible  closed,  and  follows  the 
scholastic  theology. 

Taking  a  wider  survey  and  going  beyond  the  distinctively 
rehgious  realm,  we  must  also  give  Huss  a  place  in  the  history 
of  the  struggle  for  the  rights  of  conscience.  Here,  according 
to  Lechler,  Hes  his  chief  merit.  In  spite  of  his  self-distrust 
and  gentle  nature,^  Huss  was  not  intimidated  by  the  council 
to  consent  to  a  form  of  recantation  which  he  believed  to  be 
a  falsehood.  In  a  sense  similar  to  that  intended  by  Renan, 
when  of  the  Christian  martyr  of  Lyons,  the  slave  Blandina, 
he  says  that  by  her  death  she  did  more  to  aboHsh  slavery  than 
all  the  writings  of  the  ancient  philosophers,  so  it  is  true  that 
Huss's  moral  heroism  in  the  presence  of  a  terrible  death  has 
promoted  the  cause  of  liberty  of  opinion.  If  Luther  asserted 
at  Worms  that  it  was  not  safe  to  do  anything  against  one's 
conscience,  the  same  attitude  was  also  taken  by  Huss. 
'  See  Helfert,  p.  206. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  297 

Above  all  friendships  he  placed  loyalty  to  the  truth.  Sub- 
mission to  authority  at  the  expense  of  convictions  he  refused 
to  regard  as  meritorious.  He  could  not  recant  because,  as 
he  said  again  and  again,  he  was  not  ready  to  ofifend  against 
God  and  his  conscience.  In  his  Commentary  on  the  Sentences 
of  the  Lombard,  he  stated  that  to  act  contrary  to  conscience 
is  sin,  but  he  did  not  there  take  up  the  question  whether 
resistance  to  the  church  is  sin.  He  closed  his  treatment  by 
saying  that  in  addition  to  what  he  had  written  there  were 
many  more  things  which  might  be  said  about  conscience.^ 
The  problem  of  this  relation  of  the  individual  conscience 
to  church  authority  may  have  been  among  the  things  un- 
treated. 

Gerson  himself  insisted  that  the  individual  is  bound  to 
submit  to  the  church,  putting  his  conscience  aside  so  far  as 
he  holds  views  disapproved  by  the  organization.  It  is  no 
excuse,  he  argues,  for  disobedience  before  God  or  man  that 
his  conscience  justifies  him.  Heretics  have  a  conscience,  but 
an  unenlightened  conscience.  They  have  dehberately  set 
themselves  against  God  and  arrogate  to  themselves  a  knowl- 
edge of  Gud  which  is  fals«  .  Conscience  is  no  excuse  for  error 
and  heresy.^ 

Huss  laid  down  a  principle  of  far-reaching  significance 
when  he  predicated  a  tribunal  higher  than  the  church,  the 
tribunal  of  Christ.  He  spoke  better  than  he  perhaps  knew. 
He  could  scarcely  have  foreseen  the  full  application  given  to 
that  principle  in  the  twentieth  century.  It  was  a  principle 
which  the  great  teachers  of  his  age  did  not  understand,  a 
principle  whose  very  statement  they  abhorred.  The  tribunal 
of  God  is  set  up  in  the  Scriptures,  the  Scriptures — so  Huss 

^  Super  IV.  Sent.,  p.  3SI-3S4- 

^  Eine  Beriifung  auf  das  Gewissen  erkennt  Gerson  nicht  an.  Schwab,  599. 
Hefele,  p.  217,  expresses  respect  for  Huss's  heroism  shown  in  the  face  of  death. 
It  was  for  the  author's  relatively  favorable  treatment  of  Huss,  and  his  failure 
to  justify  the  council  in  passing  this  sentence  against  him  except  by  the  standard 
of  the  age  in  which  the  council  was  held,  which  no  doubt  led  to  the  suppression 
of  the  seventh  volume  of  his  History  of  the  Councils. 


J 


298  JOHN  HUSS 

contended — not  as  interpreted  by  the  church,  but  as  inter- 
preted by  the  conscience. 

In  places  in  his  writings  he  distinctly  plead^ffor  reason  as 
a  guide  in  matters  of  religious  conduct,  such  as  prayers  and 
fasting.  With  its  aid  ecclesiastical  mandates,  distinct  from 
the  precepts  of  the  Gospel,  are  to  be  judged.  On  one  oc- 
casion, he  spoke  of  the  Scriptures,  special  divine  revelation, 
the  reason  and  experience^  as  the  guides  which  are  to  be  de- 
pended upon  in  determining  what  we  are  to  believe  and  the 
commands  we  are  to  obey.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  Huss 
meant  to  make  the  reason  co-ordinate  with  the  Scriptures 
which  contain  the  truth.  His  purpose  was  to  assert  the  rights 
of  reason  over  against  the  hierarchy  or  the  church  as  a  guide 
to  the  truth.  He  nowhere  worked  out  into  a  careful  system 
the  relation  the  Scriptures,  the  reason,  the  church  and 
Christian  experience  bear  one  to  the  other.  It  is  evident, 
however,  that  he  predicated  for  the  individual  reason,  a  place 
such  as  his  age  and  the  Schoolmen  denied  it  as  a  guide  of 
conduct  in  matters  of  religion. 

It  is,  therefore,  in  accordance  with  his  other  teachings  that 
Huss  did  not  shrink  back  from  the  word  heretic  with  the  same 
abhorrence  his  contemporaries  felt  for  it.  As  a  sermon  already 
quoted  shows,  he  even  had  a  good  word  to  say  for  the  uses 
of  heresy.  Heretics  are  dangerous,  but  their  mistakes  may 
be  very  useful.  Many  are  led  away  by  heresy,  but  by  it  the 
faithful  are  tempted  and  are  made  strong.^  This  is  a  very 
different  conception  from  that  handed  down  from  the  Middle 
Ages.  Heresy  was  a  thing  not  to  be  allowed  to  live,  and,  if 
necessary,  it  was  to  be  crushed  by  the  death  of  the  heretic. 
This  idea,  first  carried  into  practice  in  the  burning  of  the 
PriscilHanist  errorists,  385,  was  advocated  by  Pope  Leo  I  in 
450,  and  a  century  later  by  the  emperor  Justinian,  who  laid 

^Mon.,  I  :  156,  mensura  librata  ratione;  ratio  judical  de  Eccles.,  Mon., 
I  :  301,  305  sq. 

^  Ad  octo  doctores.    Mon.,  i  :  381,  383. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  299 

down  the  principle  that  heretics,  if  incorrigible,  are  to  be  put 
to  death.  Augustine's  words  appHed  to  the  Donatist  here- 
tics, "Compel  them  to  come  in,"  were  intended  to  justify 
measures  of  physical  violence  in  the  treatment  of  heretics. 
These  words  were  used  all  through  the  Middle  Ages  as  au- 
thority for  the  application  of  the  death  sentence  for  religious 
error.  Innocent  III  embodied  the  idea  in  the  estabhshment 
of  the  papal  inquisition,  and  it  further  found  expression  in 
the  Spanish  inquisition  sanctioned  by  Sixtus  IV,  1478.  The 
victims  of  the  inquisition  were  without  number.  What  Inno- 
cent III  decreed  at  the  fourth  Lateran  council,  141 5,  he  carried 
out  in  his  crusades  against  the  religious  dissenters  in  Southern 
France,  and  later  popes  against  the  Waldenses,  the  Hussites 
and  other  errorists.  The  papal  legate,  Henry  of  Citeaux,  at 
the  head  of  one  of  the  crusading  armies  in  Southern  France, 
exclaimed:  "Fell  all  to  the  ground.  The  Lord  knows  who  are 
his  own."  Heresy  was  to  be  treated  as  a  piece  of  putrid  flesh, 
to  be  burned  like  scorpions  with  the  sting  of  damnation  in 
their  tails,  to  be  cut  out  like  a  cancer,  to  be  broken  like  the 
chalice  of  Babylon  filled  with  poison.  The  legislation  of 
Frederick  II  and  Louis  IX,  which  punished  heretics  turned 
over  to  the  magistrate  by  the  church  with  death  in  the 
flames,  was  at  last  followed  by  the  English  parliament,  which 
in  1 40 1,  placed  on  the  statute  book  the  law  for  the  burning 
of  heretics — de  comburendo  heretico — intended  to  wipe  out 
Lollardy  and  Wychfism. 

The  council  of  Constance  was  distinctly  in  sympathy 
with  this  view  and  solemnly  declared  that  "heretics  should 
be  punished  even  unto  fire."  To  this  theory,  consecrated 
by  the  practice  of  centuries,  Huss  opposed  his  voice.  In  his 
Treatise  on  the  Church  he  categorically  denied  the  church's 
right  to  punish  heresy  with  the  death  penalty.  The  pope 
has  no  authority  to  impose  corporal  death.  Christ  refused 
to  pronounce  civil  sentence;  he  did  not  wish  to  condemn 
any  one  to  bodily  death — nee  voluit  civiliter  judicare  nee  morte 


300  JOHN  HUSS 

corporis  condemnare  voluit.  The  furthest  limit  to  which  Christ 
went  was  to  bid  the  church  treat  obstinate  offenders  as  heathen 
and  pubHcans  and  withdraw  from  them.^  Huss  speaks  of  the 
principle  advocated  by  the  doctors,  that  religious  offenders 
be  turned  over  to  the  magistrate  for  punishment,  as  the  san- 
guinary corollary.  It  is  true  that  in  the  presence  of  d'Ailly, 
Huss  modified  his  statement,  declaring  that  the  suspected 
heretic  should  be  labored  with  and  instructed  and  only  then, 
if  necessary,  punished  corporally.  But  the  statement  of  the 
Treatise  on  the  Church,  even  as  thus  modified,  caused  a  great 
tumult  among  the  judges.  One  of  the  charges  made  against 
Huss  by  Gerson  was  that  he  had  denied  the  right  of  the  church 
to  issue  the  interdict,  but,  so  far  as  we  know,  Huss  did  not  go 
that  far.  Gerson  went  on  to  say  that  prelates  and  princes 
were  under  obligation,  not  only  to  condemn  heretics  but,  un- 
der threat  of  severe  penalties,  to  fight  them  out  of  existence.^ 

In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  Huss's  treatise  leads  to 
the  assertion  of  the  principle  of  the  rights  of  the  individual 
conscience,  just  as  do  the  words  of  the  Westminster  Confes- 
sion, "God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  conscience,"  though  the  West- 
minster divines  were  unconscious  of  the  full  application  of 
their  noble  expression.  Along  the  line  of  Huss's  appeal  from 
all  human  tribunals  and  commandments  of  men  to  the  law 
of  Christ  and  to  Christ  himself,  is  his  far-reaching  statement, 
a  statement  which  deserves  to  be  quoted,  to  the  effect  that 
not  the  pope,  but  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  teacher  of  the  church 
and  its  safest  refuge — rejugium  securissimum  ecclesice  sanctce.^ 

In  the  discussion  of  the  power  of  the  church  over  the  lives 
of  heretics,  Huss  clearly  elaborated  a  consideration  in  his 
Reply  to  the  Eight  Doctors,  a  consideration  he  had  barely 
touched  upon  before  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church  and  in  his 
attack  against  the  papal  bulls  of  indulgence.     He  made  a  dis- 

^  De  ecdesia.    Mon.,  i  :  285.  -  Doc,  185  sq. 

^  In  Reply  to  Stanislaus,  Mon.,  354.    It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  death  penalty  also  appealed  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  did  Gerson. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  301 

tinction  between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testaments  and  his 
position  was  that  the  death  penalties  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  inflicted  in  obedience  to  immediate  divine  commands  in 
each  case.  By  the  New  Testament  measures  less  severe  are 
inculcated.^  The  example  and  the  words  of  Christ  make  for 
toleration  and  peace — ad  pacem  ducit  Christus  verbo  et  exemplo 
— and  the  death  of  ecclesiastical  offenders  is  never  justifiable, 
whether  in  war  or  by  individual  sentence,  except  by  the  au- 
thorization of  a  special  divine  revelation.  Here,  Huss  was 
far  in  advance  of  his  times  and  had  his  teachings  been  followed 
instead  of  the  spirit  and  letter  of  the  mediaeval  theology  and 
legislation,  the  cause  of  religious  toleration  would  have  re- 
ceived more  consistent  recognition  from  Protestant  Christen- 
dom than  was  the  case  at  one  time. 

Protestantism  inaugurated  the  new  era  in  regard  to  the 
treatment  of  religious  dissenters.  Luther  wrote  to  Leo  X, 
that  the  burning  of  heretics  is  contrary  to  the  will  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  declared  that  the  soul  is  not  to  be  compelled  by  physi- 
cal force  but  by  moral  suasion,  and  that  every  one  should  be 
allowed  to  believe  as  he  may  choose,  and  if  he  does  not  believe 
he  has  already  punishment  enough.^  It  is  to  be  lamented 
that  this  good  principle  was  set  aside  in  so  many  cases  by 
the  Reformers.  Calvin's  part  in  the  execution  of  Servetus 
is  greatly  to  be  condemned.  In  justification  of  Servetus's 
execution,  he  wrote  a  pamphlet  which,  upon  the  basis  of 
passages  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  justified  the  death 
penalty  for  offenses  against  the  first  table  of  the  Sinaitic 
law.  Beza,  his  successor,  also  wrote  a  treatise  along  this  line. 
The  Second  Helvetic  confession  stated  the  principle,  but  in 
spite  of  this  attitude  of  intolerance  the  trend  of  Protestant 
sentiment  and  Protestant  teaching  has  been  in  favor  of 
liberty  of  thought,  and  it  is  in  Protestant  countries  that  the 

*  Mon.,  I  :  393-396.     See  de  eccles.  chap.  XIX. 

^  Here  he  was  speaking  of  the  Anabaptists.  See  Volker,  Toleranz  und  In- 
toleranz  im  Zeitalter  der  Reformation,  191 2,  pp.  82,  89,  etc. 


302 


JOHN  HUSS 


benefits  of  religious  liberty  are  enjoyed.  In  Bohemia  a  measure 
of  toleration  was  granted  by  Joseph  II  in  1781,  and  a  larger 
liberty  in  1848.^ 

It  is  little  to  say  that  Huss  was  a  champion  of  the  rights 
of  conscience  if  we  have  in  mind  statements  only.  For  con- 
science he  was  willing  to  give  up  his  life.  By  his  death  he 
accomplished  more  than  he  could  have  accomplished  by  a 
treatise.  His  mind  was  set  on  progress  and,  following  Wyclif 
and  at  the  moment  defending  Wyclif,  he  laid  down  the  true 
principle  of  intellectual  advancement,  in  the  words:  '^If  any 
man  in  the  church  can  instruct  me  from  sacred  Scripture  or 
by  sound  reasoning,  I  am  most  willing  to  yield.  For,  from  the 
outset  of  my  studies,  I  have  laid  this  down  as  my  rule  that, 
whenever  in  any  matter  I  perceive  a  sounder  reason  than  the 
one  I  was  moved  by,  I  would  gladly  and  humbly  recede  from 
my  former  opinion,  knowing  well  that  the  things  we  know  are 
much  less  numerous  than  the  things  of  which  we  are  igno- 
rant."2 

By  his  hfe,  Huss  accomplished  much  in  winning  the  hearts 
of  men;  by  his  teachings,  he  accomplished  more;  by  his  death, 
he  accomplished  most.  A  calm  study  of  his  sufferings  in 
prison  and  at  the  stake  reveals,  as  Luther  found  out,  and  also 
Galileo's  condemnation  proved,  that  the  highest  church  tribu- 
nals err  and  it  teaches  that  wide  scope  should  be  given  in  the 
toleration  of  differences  in  matters  of  religion  and  conscience. 
It  does  not  occasion  surprise  that  even  a  temperate  Roman 
Catholic  writer  like  Helfert,  writing  more  than  half  a  century 
ago,  1853,  should  have  expressed  the  view  that  Huss's  career 


*  Lecky,  Rationalism  in  Europe,  chap.  IV,  says:  "Toleration  is  essentially  a 
normal  result  of  Protestantism,  for  it  is  the  direct,  logical,  and  inevitable  con- 
sequence of  the  due  exercise  of  private  judgment."  For  the  opposite  opinion 
Paulus,  Protesiantismus  und  Toleranz  im  i6ten  Jahrh.,  1911,  who  adduces  the 
cases  of  Protestant  intolerance,  including  Massachusetts'  treatment  of  the 
Quakers  and  Roger  Williams. 

-  Si  aliqua  persona  ecdesice  me  scriptura  sacra  vel  ratione  valida  docuerit, 
paratissime  consentire,  etc.,  de  Trinitate.  Mon.,  1  :  131.  Wyclif  had  used 
almost  the  same  words  in  his  de  Universalibus.    See  Loserth,  p.  353. 


HUSS'S  PLACE  IN  HISTORY  303 

inaugurated  the  movement  of  schismatic  and  heretical  revolt 
from  the  absolute  authority  of  the  pope  and  the  Roman 
Catholic  church.  He  quoted  the  words  of  Louis  Blanc  as  of 
a  man  competent  to  pronounce  a  judgment  when  in  his 
Origines  et  causes  de  la  revolution  franqaise  he  declared  Huss, 
''the  humble  priest,"  to  be  the  head-source  of  the  revolution- 
ary spirit  culminating  in  the  French  Revolution,  yea  the  be- 
getting genius  of  our  modern  revolutions — le  naissant  genie 
des  revolutions  modernes} 

A  hundred  years  after  Huss's  death  that  bitter  enemy 
of  the  Protestant  Reformation,  Cochla^us — Dobneck,  his  Ger- 
man name— in  his  History  of  the  Hussites  wrote  that  there 
was  no  worse  fornication  than  the  fornication  Huss  com- 
mitted with  the  Catholic  faith.^  When  he  spoke  of  fornication 
Cochlasus  meant  heresy.  To  such  a  judgment  Huss's  purity 
of  life  and  constancy  in  death  are  a  solemn  protest.  His 
principle  is  the  better  one:  "By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know 
them.  "3 

'Helfert:  Hiis.  u.  Hleronymus,  p.  260.  Schaching,  pp.  252  sqq.,  271  sqq., 
calls  Huss  the  "  revolutionary,"  and  makes  him  responsible  for  the  English 
Revolution  of  1649  and  the  French  Revolution.  Long  before  Cavour,  Maz- 
zini  and  Garibaldi,  he  began  the  work  of  breaking  up  the  papal  state. 

^  Nulla  major  fornicatio,  etc.    Hist.  Hits.  138. 

^The  view  taken  in  this  chapter  of  the  influence  of  Huss  upon  Luther  is 
expressed  by  P.  Smith,  Life  and  Letters  of  M.  Luther,  p.  71,  when  he  says:  "  An- 
other powerful  influence  towards  the  formation  of  the  new  system  of  theology 
in  Luther's  mind  was  found  in  the  writings  of  John  Huss."  See  also  Kohler: 
Luther  und  d.  K.-gesch      Erlang.,  1900. 


CHAPTER  XII 

HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES 

Ego  inipiidens  omnia  Johannis  Hus  et  docui  el  lenui,  hreviter  sumus 
omnes  Husitce  ignorantes. — Luther.     Letter  to  Spalatin,  Feb.  1520. 

Shamelessly  (unawares)  I  both  taught  and  held  all  the  teachings  of 
Huss:  in  short,  we  were  all  Hussites  without  knowing  it. 

No  human  soul  ever  bore  itself  with  loftier  fortitude  or  sweeter  or 
humbler  charity  than  John  Huss. — Lea,  Inquisition,  2  :  487. 

John  Huss  and  many  others  have  waged  harder  battles  than  we  do. 
If  our  cause  is  great,  its  author  and  champion  is  great  also. — Luther. 
Letter  to  Melanchthon,  June  27,  1530. 

The  three  men  during  the  Middle  Ages  who  received  the 
sentence  of  death  as  a  direct  consequence  of  the  action  of  the 
church  and  who  have  a  distinct  place  in  history  are  Arnold 
of  Brescia,  Huss  and  Savonarola.  Arnold  of  Brescia  left  no 
writings  and  his  followers  in  Northern  Italy  are  dim  shadows 
in  the  past  of  whom,  at  best,  we  know  but  very  little.  Savo- 
narola, of  whom  Alexander  VI  said  he  should  be  put  to  death 
even  though  he  were  another  John  the  Baptist,  left  admirers 
but  no  followers,  and  his  limited  writings,  such  as  they  are, 
have  only  a  personal  interest.  John  Huss  left  both  a  large 
body  of  writings  and  also  a  devoted  body  of  followers,  whose 
fortunes  have  contributed  a  noteworthy  chapter  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  church.  His  writings,  chiefly  in  Latin,  covering 
four  or  five  departments,  include  his  sermons,  his  letters, 
his  exegetical  works,  his  polemical  writings,  intended  to  set 
forth  his  opinion  on  points  of  controversy,  and  his  theological 
Commentary  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  the  Lombard.  His  Czech 
writings,  which  are  much  smaller  in  extent,  are  praised  for 
their  style  by  Bohemian  writers  competent  to  speak. ^ 

1  Palacky,  Gesch.,  299  sq.  Wratislaw,  349-375.  Liitzow,  200  sqq.  Two 
of  Huss's  letters  written  from  Constance  were  printed  1459  and  four  i495- 

304 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     305 

Of  his  sermons  specimens  have  already  been  given.  His 
letters,  frequently  quoted  in  this  volume,  have  an  undying 
value  for  the  purposes  of  edification,  and  are  a  chief  authority 
for  his  opinions  and  experiences  in  the  last  years  of  his  life. 
His  commentaries  on  the  Psalms  and  his  explanations  of  the 
Decalogue  and  the  Lord's  Prayer  attest  his  devotional  spirit, 
but  have  no  place  of  importance  in  the  history  of  Biblical 
exposition. 

His  Commentary  on  the  Sentences  of  Peter  the  Lombard, 
pubhshed  for  the  first  time  1905,  has  a  distinct  value  and 
enables  us  to  appreciate  more  than  we  did  before  the  extent  of 
Huss's  independent  learning.^  The  volume  contains  nearly 
eight  hundred  pages.  Peter  the  Lombard,  who  died,  11 64,  fur- 
nished in  his  four  books  of  Sentences  the  theological  text-book 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  It  was  used  by  all  the  Schoolmen  after 
his  day  in  their  lectures,  including  Thomas  Aquinas.  Huss's 
Commentary  was  delivered,  as  a  series  of  lectures  between 
1407  and  1409,  before  his  troubles  had  fairly  begun.  He 
follows  the  original  closely.  However,  in  cases  not  a  few  he 
indicates  that  he  does  not  consider  himself  to  have  exhausted 
the  specific  subject  under  treatment,  asserting  that  he  had 
left  many  questions  undiscussed.  Huss  himself  quoted  from 
his  Commentary  and  carried  it  with  him  to  Constance.  He 
used  recent  theologians,  such  as  Durandus,  Bradwardine  and 
Wyclif. 

Of  Huss's  many  polemical  works,  including  his  Treatise  on 
Indulgences,  WycHf's  Tract  on  the  Trinity  and  The  Answer  to 
the  Eight  Doctors,  the  chief  is  the  Treatise  on  the  Church — de 
Ecclesia}  It  was  the  one  from  which  the  charges  were  drawn 
that  brought  its  author  to  the  stake.  The  treatise  was  called 
forth  by  the  document  of  the  eight  members  of  the  theo- 
logical faculty  of  the  university  of  Prague  written  in  defense 

*  Magister  J.  Hus:  Super  IV.  Sentenliarum.  The  genuineness  is  not 
doubted.     Flajshans  gives  the  arguments,  p.  viii  sqq. 

^Loserth,  Wiclif  and  Hus,  p.  182,  says:  "Friends  and  foes  alike  have  al- 
ways regarded  it  with  respect." 


3o6  JOHN  HUSS 

of  John  XXIII' s  bulls  of  indulgence  and  in  protest  against 
the  XLV  Articles  of  Wyclif.'  Prepared  during  the  period  of 
his  semi-voluntary  exile  from  Prague,  1413,  and  intended  to 
be  a  justification  of  his  disregard  of  the  ecclesiastical  censures 
issued  against  him  and  the  citation  calling  him  to  Rome,  the 
work  has  properly  a  place  among  the  notable  writings  on  the 
subject  of  ecclesiology.  For  nearly  a  thousand  years  that 
subject  had  had  no  elaborate  treatment.  Augustine,  in  the 
fifth  century,  without  giving  a  definition  of  the  church,  fur- 
nished materials  of  the  greatest  importance  in  themselves  and 
for  history  in  his  controversial  works  against  the  Donatist  dis- 
senters. Before  him,  Cyprian,  who  died  a  martyr  258,  pre- 
sented the  first  definite  work  in  the  department  of  ecclesiology 
in  his  Unity  of  the  Church.  Wychf's  great  work  reopened 
the  discussion  and  he  was  followed  by  Huss. 

During  the  Middle  Ages  the  definition  and  nature  of 
the  church  were  taken  for  granted  and  not  discussed  as  a 
distinct  topic.  The  Roman  Church  was  as  clearly  defined  as 
was  the  Roman  empire,  with  its  sovereign,  its  courts  and  its 
ceremonies.  The  Schoolman  who  came  nearest  to  entering 
into  a  discussion  was  Hugo  de  St.  Victor,  who  calls  the  holy 
CathoHc  church  the  body  of  Christ  vivified  by  one  spirit, 
united  by  one  faith  and  sanctified.  "  What  is  the  church,"  he 
asks,  "but  the  totaHty  of  the  faithful — the  totahty  of  Chris- 
tians ?  "  2  Peter  the  Lombard  nowhere  takes  up  the  definition, 
and  Thomas  Aquinas,  with  whom  begins  the  special  treatment 
of  the  papacy  in  systems  of  theology,  also  practically  ignored 
the  subject  except  in  passages  where  he  was  considering  the 
pope's  absolute  supremacy.  According  to  the  mediaeval 
idea  drawn  from  Augustine,  the  church  is  the  visible  Christian 
institution,  the  corporation  out  of  which  there  is  no  salvation. 
The  definition  was  narrowed  to  the  Hmits  of  the  Roman 
Church  as  we  have  it  definitely  stated  in  the  profession  de- 

*  Doc.  475-480.    The  document  was  dated  Feb.  6,  i4i3' 
'  De  Sacramenlis,  1:2. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     307 

manded  of  the  Waldenses,  namely:  "We  believe  with  the 
heart  and  confess  that  the  one  church  is  not  of  the  heretics, 
but  is  the  Holy  Roman  Catholic  Church,  outside  of  which  no 
one  can  be  saved."  ^ 

Huss,  who  set  himself  against  this  definition,  expressly  op- 
posed Boniface's  bull  Unam  sanctam.  Wyclif  had  pronounced 
its  declaration  to  be  detested  which  made  subjection  to  the 
Roman  pontiff  necessary  to  salvation.  In  the  disputes  which 
followed  Boniface's  death,  Ockam  declared  that  the  church  is 
the  body  of  the  faithful,  including  clerics  and  laymen,  thus 
setting  aside  the  narrower  definition — not  confined  to  the 
ignorant — that  the  church  is  the  pope  and  the  cardinals. 
Konrad  of  Gelnhausen  and  others  followed  Ockam's  defini- 
tion, including,  however,  Bernard's  additional  statement: 
"  in  the  unity  of  the  sacraments."  Both  claimed  that  outside 
the  Roman  communion,  which  is  a  particular  church,  there 
may  be  salvation. 

Wyclif's  Treatise  on  the  Church — de  Ecclesia — went  much 
further  and  not  only  defined  the  church  as  the  body  of  the 
elect,  but  seems  almost  to  advocate  the  evangelical  theory 
recognizing  the  universal  priesthood  of  believers.^  Beyond 
this  work,  which  was  written  only  about  thirty  years  before 
his  own,  Huss  does  not  go.  Huss's  views  are  Wyclif's  views; 
his  Scriptural  proofs,  as  the  case  necessarily  demands,  largely 
Wyclif's  proofs.  His  indebtedness  to  his  English  forerurmer 
is  evident  not  only  in  the  movement  of  his  ideas,  but  in  large 
sections  which  are  copied  almost  verbally  from  Wyclif's 
works. 

Huss's  treatise  does  not  occupy  a  place  of  importance  in 
the  history  of  ecclesiology  by  the  originality  of  its  teachings. 
It  has,  however,  its  place  from  the  facts  that  its  positions 
were  taken  up  at  the  great  assembly  at  Constance,  that  its 
author,  on  account  of  them,  suffered  the  death  penalty,  and 

^  Schwane,  Dogmengeschichte,  p.  504. 
'  Loserth's  ed.    London,  1886,  p.  595. 


3o8  JOHN  HUSS 

that,  whereas  Wyclif's  treatise  was  not  pubhshed  until  1886, 
Huss's  work  was  printed  in  1520,  at  Wittenberg,  and  its  teach- 
ings known  to  Luther.  Through  Huss's  memory  the  question 
of  the  church  was  kept  prominent  before  Europe.  At  the 
close  of  the  fifteenth  century  Wessel,  the  Holland  Reformer, 
exclaimed:  "The  church  cannot  err;  but  what  is  the  church? 
It  is  the  communion  of  the  saints,  to  which  all  true  believers 
belong,  who  are  bound  together  by  one  faith,  one  love,  one 
hope."  The  nature  and  prerogatives  of  the  church  constituted 
a  fundamental  question  which  was  awaiting  settlement.  To 
Boniface's  proud  assertion,  which  Ockam,  Marsiglius  of 
Padua,  Wyclif  and  Huss,  in  the  light  of  Scripture  and  his- 
tory, declared  to  be  without  foundation,  it  remained  for  the 
Reformation  to  give  the  heaviest  blow. 

Seldom,  if  ever,  has  one  author  been  under  so  deep  a  debt 
of  obligation  to  a  teacher  as  Huss  was  to  Wyclif.  Not  only 
did  Huss  adopt  many  of  the  ideas  of  Wyclif,  he  appropriated 
whole  paragraphs  of  his  writing  and  transferred  them  to  his 
own  pages.^  While  this  cannot  be  gainsaid,  yet  in  explana- 
tion it  must  be  said  that  Huss  was  no  servile  imitator  nor  did 
he  seek  to  play  a  part  in  the  garments  of  another.  His  soul 
burned  with  passion  for  the  truths  which  he  defended.  More- 
over, his  treatises  have  a  character  of  their  own.  They  are 
more  direct  and  practical  than  Wychf's  and  better  adapted 
to  reach  the  ear  of  the  average  man,  and  move  him.  Wyclif 
goes  off  into  all  sorts  of  side  discussions  which  are  not  essen- 
tial to  his  main  point  and  shows  more  of  the  scholastic  ten- 
dency to  enter  upon  nice  philosophic  discriminations.  Both 
are  Scriptural,  but  Huss  the  more  Scriptural,  arguing  from 
the  standpoint  of  an  experimental  knowledge  of  the  Scrip- 
tures as  well  as  from  their  letter.  Wyclif  has  the  sharpness 
of  the  polemic,  Huss  the  persuasion  of  the  advocate.  Huss 
does  not  employ  the  strong  epithets  with  which  Wyclif  ac- 
centuates his  statements.  He  nowhere  calls  the  pope  "the 
*  This  is  shown  clearly  by  Loserth,  pp.  181-290. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     309 

vicar  of  the  fiend"  or  a  ''terrible  devil,"  the  epithet  Wyclif 
employs  of  Gregory  XL 

It  must  also  be  remembered  that  Huss  issued  his  polemical 
writings  within  the  narrow  limits  of  two  or  three  years,  be- 
ginning with  his  Treatise  on  Indulgences.  In  each  case  the 
cause  was  urgent,  the  feeling  intense  in  Prague  and  in  the 
writer's  own  heart.  What  he  wrote,  he  was  obliged  to  write 
quickly. 

The  Commentary  ott  the  Sentences  shows  that  Huss  had 
a  much  larger  gift  for  original  thought  and  writing  than  it  has 
been  recently  the  custom  to  credit  him  with.  This  work  has 
the  marks  of  independent  theological  discussion  and  it  also 
evinces  Huss's  acquaintance  with  the  wide  field  of  theolog- 
ical knowledge.  He  quotes  Wyclif,  though  not  at  length. 
He  refers  to  him  once  by  name,  and  then  to  bear  witness  to 
his  deep  regard  for  his  master  and  give  expression  to  his  own 
merciful  view  of  the  judgments  of  God.  Referring  to  those 
who  with  great  assurance  pronounced  Wyclif  eternally  damned 
in  hell,  he  declared  that  he  ventured  to  dissent  from  that 
judgment  and  hoped  that  Wyclif  was  of  the  number  of  the 
saved.  And  he  observed  that,  in  case  Wyclif  was  in  heaven, 
there  would  be  additional  ground  for  praising  the  Lord,  who 
has  received  him  there  or,  in  case  Wychf  was  in  purgatory, 
he  hoped  the  Lord  would  in  his  mercy  liberate  him  quickly.^ 
Huss  had  been  speaking  in  the  Une  of  hopeful  reliance  upon 
God's  mercy.  First  and  last,  he  says:  "I  lean  more  toward 
hope,  trusting  the  mercy  of  God,  than  to  despair,  looking  in 
the  direction  of  eternal  damnation,  from  which  the  omnipo- 
tent God  in  mercy  deliver  us,  and  we  praise  God  for  His  most 
gracious  mercy,  because  even  in  the  hour  of  death  He  is  so 
merciful  to  forgive." 

*  P.  621.  Loserth  after  the  publication  of  Huss's  Commentary  modified 
his  sweeping  judgment  in  regard  to  Huss's  dependence  upon  Wyclif  and  said: 
"We  can  assume  it  as  certain  that  our  previous  judgment  in  regard  to  Huss's 
literary  work  must  be  altered  in  several  points,  and  that  it  will  be  apprised 
at  a  considerably  higher  value  than  heretofore." — Mittheil.  des  Inst.  f.  osterr. 
Geschichtsjorschung.    No.  26. 


3IO  JOHN  HUSS 

Huss's  Commentary  is  a  clear,  straightforward  and  judi- 
cious theological  treatise,  with  a  strong  practical  tendency. 
It  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  moderate  statement  of  the  theology 
of  the  age  in  which  its  author  lived.  He  does  not  depart 
from  the  official  tenets,  yet  he  modifies  them.  Certain  pruri- 
ent questions  he  declines  altogether  to  answer.  Such  ques- 
tions he  pronounces  of  little  profit,  and,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  condition  of  the  lost,  he  relegates  the  solution  of  many  of 
the  problems  to  the  light  of  the  day  of  judgment.  The  author 
places  above  all  scientific  knowledge  of  religion,  the  law  of 
Christ  and  the  duty  of  love  to  one's  neighbor  which  he  turns 
aside  again  and  again  to  emphasize,  as  he  does  also  the  words, 
that  by  their  fruits  shall  men  be  known.  ^ 

Huss  has  also  the  honor  of  having  had  a  part  in  Bohemian 
hymnody.  He  sent  to  certain  nuns  a  song  to  be  chanted  at 
vespers,  a  chant  which  he  bade  them  sing  with  the  heart  as 
well  as  with  the  melody  of  the  lips.  As  in  the  movement  led 
by  Savonarola  there  was  a  revival  of  hymn  singing,  so  it  was 
in  Prague  under  Huss's  leadership.  Huss  revived  ancient 
Bohemian  hymns  and,  after  his  death,  the  singing  of  sacred 
songs  characterized  his  followers.  Three  hymns  are  ascribed 
to  him  in  the  hymn-book  of  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  1576. 
Among  all  the  1516  hymns  of  the  Moravian  hymn-book,  pub- 
lished at  Bethlehem,  1891,  only  one  is  ascribed  to  him: 

To  avert  from  men  God's  wrath 
Jesus  suffered  in  our  stead; 
By  an  ignominious  death 
He  a  full  atonement  made. 

A  Latin  hymn  ascribed  to  Huss  of  old  has  these  as  its  first 
two  verses: 

Jesus  Christus  nostra  salus, 
Quod  reclamat  omnis  malus, 
Nobis  in  sui  memoriam, 
Dedit  hanc  panis  hostiam. 

^  Flajshans  ed.,  p.  xl. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     311 

0  quam  sanctus  panis  iste, 
Tu  solus  es  Jesu  Christe, 
Caro,  cibus,  sacr amentum, 
Quo  non  majus  est  inventum. 

Our  true  salvation  Jesus  Christ, 
From  evil  all  recalling, 
To  us  the  sacred  bread  has  given, 
In  memory  of  himself. 

0,  how  sacred  is  this  bread 

Thou  alone,  O  Jesus  Christ 

Art  flesh,  food  and  sacrament 

Than  which  naught  greater  can  be  found. ^ 

Huss's  influence  was  perpetuated  in  a  large  body  of  devoted 
followers  in  Bohemia  and  Moravia.  Seldom,  if  ever,  has  a 
nation  shown  such  personal  love  for  a  national  and  religious 
leader.  His  spirit  had  won  the  hearts  of  his  people,  his  teach- 
ings had  attracted  their  intellectual  approval.  His  death 
had  deepened  into  a  strong  stream  their  devotion  to  him  and 
his  cause.  For  him  and  his  teachings  the  nation  showed 
itself  willing  to  undergo  the  bitterest  of  persecutions  until 
a  large  part  of  it  had  suffered  the  martyrdom  of  banishment 
or  death. 

When  the  news  of  Huss's  death  reached  Bohemia,  a  large 
part  of  the  nation  broke  out  in  revolt.  The  bishop  of  Lei- 
tomysl,  the  chief  Bohemian  ecclesiastic  at  Constance,  Sigis- 
mund,  and  the  council  itself,  all  three  sought  to  check  the 
rebellion,  now  by  explanations  and  now  by  threats.  Only  a 
rapid  survey  can  here  be  given  of  the  devotion  shown  to 
Huss's  memory,  the  development  of  the  parties  which  honored 
his  name,  the  desolating  crusades  which  were  preached  against 
the  Hussites  by  the  pope,  the  lamentable  strife  between  the 
two  wings  of  his  followers  and  the  extermination  of  Hussitism. 

^  Mon.,  2  :  520.      Doctor  Philip  SchafiE  quotes  two  of  the  verses  in  his 
Christ  in  Song,  464. 


312  JOHN  HUSS 

So  profound  was  the  impression  Huss's  death  made  upon 
his  people  that  in  Prague  and  in  the  villages,  in  church  and  on 
street,  every  man  was  distinctly  for  him  or  against  him.  A 
contemporary  chronicler  says:  "Every  household  in  Bohemia 
is  divided,  the  wife  against  the  husband,  the  father  against 
the  child,  and  the  host  against  his  guests."  The  houses  of 
the  anti-Hussites  were  plundered  or  even  destroyed.  Priests 
of  the  old  way  suffered  personal  injury  or  were  driven  from 
their  parishes.  The  doubtful  report  ran  on  the  streets  of 
Constance  that  priests  were  even  drowned  in  the  Moldau  and 
killed  with  the  sword. ^ 

Especially  was  the  Iron  Bishop,  John  of  Leitomysl,  the 
object  of  popular  indignation.  He  was  looked  upon  as  the 
unfeeling  leader  against  Huss  at  Constance.  Nobles  seques- 
trated part  of  his  domains  and  on  his  return  he  had  to  be  pro- 
tected from  violence.  On  the  other  hand,  great  nobles  identi- 
fied themselves  with  the  Hussite  movement,  Cenek  of  Wartem- 
berg,  Lacek  of  Krawar  and  others,  men  who  occupied  the 
highest  positions  in  the  state.  Wenzel,  if  he  did  not  espouse 
the  cause  of  the  religious  revolution,  at  least  showed  himself 
indifferent  in  seeing  that  the  peace  was  kept.  The  queen 
was  an  open  sympathizer  and  was  surrounded  by  women  of 
like  mind.  John  of  Jesenicz  continued  to  be  a  favorite  at  the 
court.  Had  Wenzel  been  a  man  of  strength,  he  would  prob- 
ably have  abandoned  his  cautious  attitude  and  openly  sup- 
ported the  great  body  of  his  nobles  in  defending  Huss's  mem- 
ory and  promoting  the  principles  for  which  he  died. 

Not  until  five  days  had  elapsed  after  Huss's  death  did 
Leitomysl  venture  to  apprise  the  king  of  what  had  occurred. 
Instead  of  proceeding  at  once  to  communicate  the  news,  he 
apologized  for  having  been  silent  so  long  and  he  approached 
his  statement  gradually  with  remarks  about  Gregory  XII's 
resignation  and  Benedict's  probable  refusal  to  resign.     He 

^  Palacky,  Gesch.,  378.     Nieheim  in  Hardi,  2  :  410.     Palacky,  Gesch.,  371, 
doubts  the  rumor. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     313 

then  announced  that  Huss  had  been  burned  alive,  that  his 
teachings  and  the  teachings  of  WycUf  had  been  condemned 
and  that  Jerome's  case  was  being  considered.  He  expressed 
the  general  regret  that  no  messenger  had  reached  the  council 
from  the  king,  and  that  it  was  rumored,  though  he  beheved 
falsely,  that  the  king  had  looked  with  favor  upon  Huss.  He 
heard  that  many  things  had  been  reported  to  Wenzel  about 
himself  which  seemed  to  indicate  that  he  was  acting  in  op- 
position to  the  king  and  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia,  but  he 
called  upon  the  king  not  to  give  them  credence.  On  his  re- 
turn from  Constance,  he  would  explain  his  course,  and,  as  he 
thought,  to  the  king's  satisfaction. 

In  very  different  tone  and  language  did  the  bishop  on  the 
same  day  write  to  Konrad,  archbishop  of  Prague.  He  de- 
clared he  had  worked  with  might  to  assert  the  fair  fame  of 
Bohemia  and  to  dehver  it  from  the  pestiferous  and  most 
dangerous  heresy  and  schism  with  which  it  was  threatened 
because  of  those  most  dangerous  heresiarchs,  John  Wyclif  and 
John  Huss.  All  rigor  had  been  employed  by  the  council  in 
its  procedure.  As  for  himself,  he  had  not  tried  to  palliate 
in  the  least  the  events  which  had  been  occurring  in  Bohemia, 
and  he  hoped  that  the  archbishop  would  now  see  to  it  that 
the  king  sent  legates  to  Constance  and  promised  obedience 
for  his  kingdom.^ 

A  strong  plea  for  the  unity  of  the  Bohemian  church  was 
made  by  the  council  itself  in  demanding  that  its  decrees  be 
obeyed.  In  a  communication  dated  July  26,  addressed  to 
the  nobles  and  other  chief  citizens  of  Bohemia,  the  holy 
synod  of  Constance,  representing  the  universal  church  of  God," 
declared  that  it  had  Bohemia  upon  its  heart  day  and  night. 
It  spoke  of  the  hideousness  of  the  terrible  schism  and  the 
most  pernicious  wickedness  of  the  heresy  which  had  arisen 
in  that  time.  The  synod  had  taken  measures  to  restore  to 
the  church  the  sweetness  of  peace  and  to  free  it  from  noxious 

^  Doc,  564  sqq. 


314  JOHN   HUSS 

briars.  By  his  foul  and  detestable  doctrine,  John  Wyclif  had 
sought  to  turn  the  church  away  from  fundamental  teachings. 
No  one  had  ever  before  assailed  the  faith  under  the  veil  of 
the  Christian  religion  as  he  had  done  and  no  one  had  been 
so  perverse  and  contumacious  in  defying  holy  church.  His 
books  had  been  ordered  burned  and  his  bones  exhumed.  His 
poisonous  doctrine  had  infected  the  minds  of  John  Huss  and 
Jerome.  From  such  men  of  perdition  the  synod  had  at- 
tempted to  free  the  kingdom  of  Bohemia.  Huss  had  been 
given  every  opportunity  at  Constance  and  had  been  heard 
repeatedly  by  commissions  in  private  and  in  public.  The 
emperor,  Sigismund,  had  been  present.  The  synod  had  at- 
tempted to  persuade  Huss  of  his  errors  and  proceeded  in  a 
spirit  of  forbearance,  wishing  the  hfe  and  not  the  death  of 
the  sinner.  At  the  devil's  instigation,  he  persisted  and  became 
more  perverse.  He  was  sentenced  and  went  forth  to  death 
through  the  act  of  the  civil  power.  The  synod  adjured  the 
magnates  of  Bohemia  to  prevent  pestiferous  men  from  sowing 
the  seeds  of  Wyclifite  and  Hussite  heresy  and  to  see  to  it 
that  the  stain  might  be  completely  wiped  out  from  Bohemia.^ 

The  council  was  ready  to  back  up  its  sentence  with  all 
the  authority  at  its  command.  In  sending  the  bishop  of 
Leitomysl  back  to  Bohemia,  with  the  commission  to  uproot 
heresy,  restore  order  and  strike  a  death  blow  at  the  moral 
cancer,  the  council  commended  him  as  a  "son  of  obedience 
and  a  brave  and  discreet  soldier  of  Christ."  It  instructed 
him  to  excommunicate  rebellious  prelates,  depriving  them  of 
their  Kvings,  and  also  all  obstinate  laymen  of  every  degree, 
from  the  nobles  down,  who  were  suspects  of  heresy,  and  to 
deprive  them  and  their  children  forever  of  all  rights  and  lands 
given  them  by  the  church.  And,  if  necessary,  he  should  call 
in  the  aid  of  the  secular  arm — auxilium  hrachii  secularis. 

The  feeling  in  Bohemia  was  not  to  be  allayed  with  let- 
ters nor  was  order  to  be  established  by  the  presence  of  the 

*  Doc,  568  sqq. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     315 

powerful  bishop  with  the  authority  of  the  council  behind  him. 
Early  in  September  the  revolt  took  the  form  of  a  pact  by 
which  the  nobles  agreed  to  defend  Huss's  memory  against 
aspersion  and  to  perpetuate  the  principles  of  his  teaching. 
It  was  signed  at  a  diet  held  in  Prague  and  pledged  the  nobles' 
support  for  a  period  of  six  years.  Four  hundred  and  fifty- 
two  Bohemian  and  Moravian  magnates  attached  their  signa- 
tures.^ 

This  notable  agreement  started  out  with  quotations  from 
the  Scriptures:  ''All  things  whatsoever  ye  would  that  men 
should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them"  and  "love  is  the 
fulfilling  of  the  law."  In  view  of  this  rule,  the  signers  ex- 
pressed themselves  as  confounded  at  the  condemnation  of 
Huss  to  the  flames,  a  man  honored  as  a  teacher  and  as  an 
evangehcal  preacher,  and  at  the  same  time  their  most  beloved 
brother.  He  was  a  good,  righteous  and  CathoHc  man,  known 
and  respected  for  many  years  in  Bohemia  for  his  good  life,  a 
man  who  had  taught  and  preached  the  law  of  the  Gospel, 
detesting  heresies  and  admonishing  all  to  detest  them  and  to 
love  the  things  which  make  for  peace  and  charity.  How  such 
a  man  could  be  condemned,  living  most  piously  in  Christ  and 
urging  all  to  the  limit  of  his  power  to  obey  the  Gospel,  they 
could  not  comprehend.  What  they  said  of  Huss,  they  might 
also  say  of  Jerome,  a  man  of  eloquence  and  learning,  incar- 
cerated and  already,  as  was  probable,  given  over  to  most 
cruel  death  as  a  heretic.  Their  injuries  they  would  leave  to 
God,  their  complaints  they  would  lay  before  the  next  pope 
whom  they  promised  to  obey. 

Further,  they  pledged  themselves  to  defend  the  law  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  his  faithful  teachers,  even  unto  the 
shedding  of  their  blood.  They  promised  obedience  to  all  right- 
eous authority  exercised  by  their  bishops,  but  would  refuse  to 
submit  to  unjust  acts.  They  would  respect  only  such  just  ex- 
communications as  the  bishops  of  Bohemia  and  Moravia  might 

» Doc,  580-595- 


3i6  JOHN  HUSS 

publicly  post  up.  In  disputed  matters  they  would  appeal  for 
counsel  to  the  university  of  Prague.  Whatever  the  apostolic 
see  commanded  they  would  submit  to,  provided  it  was  not 
contrary  to  God  and  His  law.  A  committee  was  appointed 
by  the  diet  to  pass  judgment  upon  episcopal  censures  and  to 
see  that  the  pact  was  observed,  consisting  of  Cenek  of  War- 
temberg,  Lacek  of  Krawar  and  Bocek  of  Podiebrad. 

Here  we  have  unimpeachable  testimony  to  the  personal 
purity  of  Huss  and  the  profound  influence  he  had  exerted 
in  his  native  land.  What  he  had  preached,  Bohemian  nobles 
regarded  as  in  accord  with  the  Scriptures,  upon  which  they 
firmly  planted  themselves  as  determining  the  rule  of  faith 
and  daily  conduct.  The  document  promised  full  liberty  of 
preaching,  and  the  signers  pledged  themselves  to  support  it 
three  times  on  the  Lord's  Day  on  their  territories  and  in  all 
churches  and  monasteries  without  allowing  any  hinderance. 
Any  priest  coming  and  asking  for  the  privilege  of  preaching 
the  Word  of  God  should  have  the  privilege  granted 

The  council  also  had  sympathizers,  who  met  October  i, 
at  Bohmisch  Brod  under  the  protection  of  archbishop  Konrad. 
Fourteen  of  them  signed  a  paper,  which  is  not  extant  but 
which,  it  is  known,  pledged  the  signers  to  the  support  of  the 
council.  King  Wenzel,  it  is  said,  promised  by  word  of  mouth 
his  adhesion  to  this  second  document. 

Not  until  nearly  a  year  had  elapsed  since  Huss's  death 
did  Bohemia  hear  directly  from  the  emperor,  Sigismund. 
After  that  event  he  had  journeyed  to  Spain  to  induce  Benedict 
to  resign  and  go  from  there  to  England.  In  the  first  of  three 
letters,  written  from  Paris,  March,  1416,  the  emperor  com- 
mended the  nobles  who  remained  true  to  the  council.  To 
the  signers  of  the  pact  he  wrote  that  the  troubles  in  which 
Huss  became  involved  were  due  most  probably  to  his  having 
gone  alone  to  Constance.  Several  times  Sigismund  himself 
had  left  the  council  in  indignation,  but,  if  he  had  objected  to 
the  continuation  of  the  trial,  that  body  would  have  adjourned. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     317 

If  the  nobles  of  Bohemia  persisted  in  defending  Huss's  cause, 
they  would  be  resisting  the  whole  body  of  Christendom.  He 
hoped  they  would  give  aid  to  his  brother  and  assume  a  posi- 
tion which  would  be  profitable  to  themselves  and  Bohemia. 

In  the  third  letter,  addressed  to  the  members  of  both  par- 
ties, Sigismund  expressed  sorrow  for  the  situation  in  which  his 
dearest  brother  was  placed  and  wrote,  they  were  all  Christians 
and  for  that  reason  it  was  becoming  to  observe  order  and 
discipHne.  Their  fathers  had  handed  down  to  them  the  true 
religion  and  he  begged  them  to  follow  the  path  of  peace  and 
avoid  strife.^ 

The  bishop  of  Leitomysl,  who  found  himself  unsafe  in  his 
own  diocese,  had  a  strong  support  in  the  vicar-general  of 
Prague  and  the  cathedral  chapter.  With  the  exception  of  the 
cathedral,  the  stronger  parishes  of  the  city  were  in  the  hands 
of  Hussite  priests.  On  September  5,  the  very  day  the  nobles 
were  signing  the  pact,  the  cathedral  chapter,  following  past 
decisions  of  the  synod  of  Prague  and  the  decree  of  the  council 
at  Constance,  ordered  priests  to  abandon  giving  the  cup  to 
the  laity  upon  pain  of  excommunication  and,  two  weeks 
later,  it  ordered  the  execution  of  the  ban  upon  all  itinerant 
preachers. 

On  November  i,  it  placed  the  capital  under  the  interdict, 
one  of  the  grounds  set  forth  being  the  presence  of  John 
of  Jesenicz  at  the  palace,  upon  whom  had  been  laid  the  ban 
of  excommunication.  In  spite  of  Jesenicz's  withdrawal  from 
the  city  a  few  weeks  later  and  in  spite  of  the  king's  protest, 
the  interdict  was  maintained.  It  was  urged  that  others,  such 
as  Cenko  of  Wartemberg,  who  were  under  the  ban,  remained 
in  the  city  and  that  the  Hussite  priests,  who  had  been  in- 
stalled in  place  of  the  old  incumbents,  were  celebrating  in 
sacred  things,  and  that  some  of  the  old  priests  had  been 
seized  and  were  led  to  prison  by  the  Prague  magistrates.  The 
king  was  called  upon  to  see  that  the  nobles  under  excom- 

*  Doc,  619-621. 


3i8  JOHN  HUSS 

munication  left  the  city  and  that  the  other  complaints  were 
recognized. 

In  February,  141 6,  the  council  of  Constance  summoned 
to  its  bar  the  four  hundred  and  fifty- two  nobles.^  A  com- 
missioner from  each  of  the  nations  was  appointed  to  act  on 
a  court  of  trial.  On  hearing  of  the  citation,  Sigismund  de- 
manded that  further  proceedings  be  postponed  until  his  return 
to  Constance.  That  such  measures  were  insufficient  to  meet 
the  situation,  appears  distinctly  from  a  letter  addressed  by 
the  council  to  the  nobility  of  Bohemia  a  month  later.^  It 
lamented  again  the  leaven  of  wickedness  which  originated 
with  the  old  enemy  of  mankind,  the  serpent,  who  is  never  at 
rest  and  had  manifested  his  power  in  John  Wychf ,  of  accursed 
memory,  John  Huss  and  others,  and  inebriated  them  with 
the  chalice  of  Babylon.  These,  in  turn,  had  handed  that  cup 
of  damnable  error  and  wickedness  to  others.  Some,  who 
according  to  the  flesh  were  prominent  among  the  nobility,  had 
damnably  conspired  against  Christ  to  defend  their  errors. 

As  for  Huss,  he  had  been  convicted  many  times  of  the 
most  manifest  and  dangerous  heresies  both  judicially  and  by 
scholastic  arguments.  In  spite  of  the  law,  divine  and  human, 
that  he  should  not  be  released  from  prison  and  chains,  he  was 
accorded  public  hearings  and  an  opportunity  for  repentance. 
The  attempt  was  also  made  to  bring  him  back  to  the  lap  of 
the  church  and  to  the  truth  of  the  Christian  religion  by 
exhortations  of  sweetest  love  and  superabundant  instruction 
about  the  Catholic  faith.  These  admonitions  fell  on  dull, 
viperous  ears,  for  Huss  loved  iniquity  and  at  last,  going  to 
his  own  place,  he  received  the  reward  due  him  and  his  follow- 
ers for  their  crimes — he  the  most  miserable  of  all  miserable 
men. 

The  council  adjured  the  nobles  to  protect  the  church 
and  assist  its  legate,  the  bishop  of  Leitomysl,  in  the  whole- 

*  The  bull  was  posted  up  at  Passau,  May  3,  1416,  May  5,  at  Constance, 
May  10,  in  Vienna,  etc. 
^  Doc,  615-619. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     319 

some  work  of  purif3ang  the  kingdom  of  heretical  infection. 
Rumors  of  the  worst  kind  were  abundant  in  Constance,  to 
the  effect  that  monasteries  and  their  occupants,  as  well  as 
the  secular  clergy  and  their  churches,  had  been  robbed  and 
all  sorts  of  injuries  and  indignities  heaped  upon  the  old  clergy, 
even  unto  murder. 

Archbishop  Konrad  himself  was  cited  to  appear  before 
the  council  and  answer  for  his  indifference.  Nor  did  the  king 
and  his  consort,  Sophia,  escape.  On  the  contrary,  charges 
were  preferred  against  them.  The  council  accused  the  king 
of  tolerating  John  of  Jesenicz  at  the  court,  defending  those 
who  preached  heresies,  favoring  the  communion  in  both  kinds, 
winking  at  the  expulsion  of  some  of  the  Catholic  clergy  and 
the  substitution  of  Hussites  in  their  places.  Sophia  was 
accused  of  having  often  heard  Huss  preach  after  the  censures 
of  the  church  had  been  launched  against  him,  of  supporting 
his  heretical  views  and  practices,  of  receiving  the  cup  and  of 
casting  out  priests  hostile  to  the  new  views  and  introducing 
others  who  distributed  the  cup  to  the  laity. 

The  council  ordered  the  magistrates  of  Prague  and  the 
Wyssehrad  to  deliver  Jesenicz  up  to  the  diocesan  for  im- 
prisonment and  called  upon  the  emperor  to  take  up  the  case 
of  his  brother  and  bring  him  to  a  right  state  of  mind  and 
practice.  It  announced  to  the  emperor  that  in  Bohemia  the 
hot  flames  were  spreading  throughout  the  entire  country, 
threatening  all  CathoHcs  who  were  pious  behevers.  The  veri- 
table sons  of  BeUal,  the  followers  of  WycHf,  Huss  and  Jerome, 
went  even  so  far  as  to  enter  into  sacrilegious  marriages  and  in 
their  sermons  treat  Huss  and  Jerome  as  saints,  worshipping 
them  as  citizens  of  heaven  and  singing  masses  to  them  as 
martyrs,  men  whom  the  holy  church  had  dehvered  over  to 
Satan  as  heretics  and  blasphemers.  The  deplorable  state  of 
things,  it  alleged,  was  made  worse  by  the  attitude  taken  by 
the  university  which  many  scholars,  anxious  for  knowledge, 
had  attended  in  a  previous  period,  but  was  then  shunned  by 


320  JOHN  HUSS 

every  conscientious  man  who  hated  the  errors  which  thrived 
there,  especially  by  every  foreigner. 

The  council  reminded  Sigismund  that  one  reason  for  its 
having  been  convened  was  that  it  might  take  measures  for  the 
extermination  of  heresy  and  the  reforming  of  a  world  infected 
with  error.  This  task  it  had  in  part  fulfilled  by  consigning 
two  heretics  to  the  secular  arm.  It  belonged  to  him  as  the 
defender  and  advocate  of  the  church  to  put  forth  his  might 
to  abash  perfidy  and  eliminate  all  heresy.  Delay  was  danger- 
ous. He  should  be  quick  to  act  for  the  salvation  of  those  who 
were  wandering  about  as  lost.  He  should  act  while  there 
was  yet  hope. 

This  was  an  open  call  to  the  emperor  to  put  down  by  the 
sword,  if  necessary,  the  religious  revolt  of  Bohemia.  The 
appeal  did  not  wait  long  to  be  complied  with  and  the  respon- 
sibility for  the  blood  with  which  Bohemia  was  drenched  in 
the  anti-Hussite  crusade  rests  upon  the  council. 

To  the  council's  address,  which  was  passed  by  the  five 
nations,  Sigismund  replied  that,  if  his  brother  had  not  suffi- 
cient authority  to  proceed,  he  would  go  to  his  aid.  If  it  were 
necessary  to  resort  to  force  and  the  sword,  he  prayed  that  the 
execution  of  the  task  might  be  committed  to  another  rather 
than  himself,  lest  he  be  exposed  to  the  suspicion  of  being 
moved,  not  with  zeal  against  the  Wychfites  but  by  a  desire  to 
humble  his  brother  and  make  spoil  of  his  kingdom. 

In  a  further  communication  to  the  barons,  dated  September 
4,  141 7,  Sigismund  called  their  attention  to  the  wide-spread 
rebellion  in  Bohemia,  and,  if  possible,  outdid  the  council  in 
the  appalling  narrative  he  gave  of  the  injuries  heaped  upon 
the  priests  of  the  old  regime.  He  referred  to  the  Neronic 
persecution  which  was  going  on  with  the  purpose  of  forcing 
the  priests  to  abjure  the  Catholic  faith.  In  fact,  so  dire  was 
the  persecution  that  such  a  use  of  force  in  religion  had  not 
been  known,  even  in  the  times  of  Pharaoh  or  the  pagan  per- 
secutors of  the  church.     The  council  had  brought  charges 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     321 

against  Wenzel,  but  he  had  interfered  to  protect  his  best 
beloved  brother,  in  the  hope  that  he  would  put  aside  his  in- 
difference and  put  a  stop  to  the  enormities  which  were  being 
perpetrated.  In  case  the  council  found  its  ecclesiastical 
censures  unavailing  and  felt  itself  obhged  to  insist  on  secular 
aid,  he  hoped  the  barons  would  exonerate  him  from  all  guilt 
in  the  case. 

While  these  communications  were  being  interchanged  be- 
tween Constance  and  Prague,  Huss's  friend,  Jerome,  was 
being  tried:  and  he  was  burned,  May  30,  141 6.  Jerome  dif- 
fered from  Huss  in  the  circumstances  of  his  birth,  being  of  a 
noble  family,  and  in  his  personal  presence,  being  a  large  and 
strong  man.  He  was  restless,  as  his  career  shows.  Educated 
in  Prague,  where  he  was  promoted  to  the  B.  A.  degree,  1398, 
he  travelled  abroad  and  after  various  experiences  went  to 
Oxford,  where  he  copied  with  his  own  hand  Wyclif's  Dialogus 
and  Trialogus,  which  he  took  back  with  him  to  Bohemia. 
In  1403,  he  visited  Palestine  and  two  years  later  was  at  Paris, 
and  afterward  at  Cologne  and  Heidelberg,  taking  the  M.  A. 
degree  from  each  university. 

From  the  first,  Jerome  was  on  intimate  terms  with  Huss 
and,  in  14 10,  defended  Wyclif's  writings  at  the  Prague  uni- 
versity, though  he  denied  accepting  everything  that  Wyclif 
stood  for.  At  Vienna  he  was  cast  into  prison  on  the  charge 
of  being  a  WycUfite.  He  escaped,  but  was  followed  with 
the  ban  of  excommunication  by  the  archbishop  of  Vienna. 
He  stood  by  Huss  in  the  strife  over  the  rights  of  the  Bohemian 
nation  at  the  university  and  in  attacking  the  crusading  letters 
of  John  XXIII.  When  Huss  started  out  for  his  journey  to 
Constance,  Jerome  warned  him  that  he  would  not  get  back 
alive.  Against  Huss's  advice  he  appeared  in  Constance  in 
the  spring  of  141 5,  and  posted  up  a  notice  asking  for  safe- 
conduct  from  the  council  and  Sigismund. 

While  returning  to  Prague,  he  was  seized  at  Hirschau 
and  taken  back  to  Constance,  May  23,  with  chains  on  his 


32  2  JOHN  HUSS 

hands.  He  was  remanded  to  prison  and,  at  his  trial  in  the 
Franciscan  refectory,  was  recognized  by  Gerson  and  teachers 
of  Heidelberg  and  Cologne  as  one  of  their  former  students 
and  inclined  to  heretical  looseness.  The  proceedings  against 
him  were  delayed  by  Huss's  execution.  On  June  6,  in  a  letter 
written  to  John  of  Chlum,  Huss  referred  to  Jerome  as  his 
beloved  brother,  to  whom  he  hoped  dying  constancy  would 
be  given,  as  also  to  himself.  He  had  heard  from  commis- 
sioners of  the  council  that  Jerome  would  suffer  death.  Writing 
to  his  friends  in  Bohemia  on  June  27,  Huss  said,  to  quote  the 
letter  again,  that  God  only  knew  why  his  own  death  and  the 
death  of  his  dear  brother  Jerome  were  being  delayed.  He 
hoped  that  Jerome  would  die  without  incurring  guilt  and 
show  a  firmer  spirit  in  the  hour  of  the  ordeal  than  he  himself, 
a  weak  sinner,  possessed.^ 

Huss's  case  being  disposed  of,  the  council  exerted  itself 
to  turn  Jerome  from  his  errors  and  its^  attempt  was  crowned 
with  success.  Converted  from  his  perfidy,  the  prisoner  made 
his  recantation  in  the  presence  of  the  four  nations  and  later, 
September  23,  before  the  council  in  its  nineteenth  session. 
Being  at  the  time,  as  he  declared,  under  no  compulsion  he  re- 
pudiated the  articles  of  WycHf  and  of  Huss,  approved  the 
condemnation  of  the  two  men  and  promised  to  communicate 
to  the  Bohemian  people  a  statement  of  his  act  and  the  reasons 
leading  him  to  it.  The  rigor  of  his  imprisonment  was  relaxed, 
but  a  difference  of  opinion  prevailed  as  to  the  wisdom  of  his 
release.  D'Ailly,  Zabarella  and  other  influential  councillors 
favored  it,  while  Gerson  took  the  other  side.  The  moderate 
party  yielded. 

Jerome  continued  to  languish  in  prison  for  nearly  six 
months,  when  a  new  trial  was  inaugurated,  apparently  at  the 

^Doc,  141.  For  Jerome's  life,  see  Mon.,  2  :  522-534.  In  1878,  Jaroslav 
Goll  published  at  Prague  a  MS.  which  he  had  found  in  Freiburg  giving  an  ac- 
count of  Jerome's  arrest  and  death. 

2  For  a  full  account  of  the  trial,  Hardt,  4:  629-691,   6:  191  sqq.;  Mansi, 
27  :  794  sqq.,  842-864.     For  Jerome's  recantation,  also  Mon.,  2  :  525  5^. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     323 

instance  of  certain  Carmelites  who  had  recently  reached  Con- 
stance. It  is  possible  they  were  moved  by  the  recollection 
of  Jerome's  sacrilege  in  overthrowing  the  reliquary  in  the 
Carmelite  church  of  Maria  Schnee  in  Prague  and  his  abuse 
of  the  monks  at  that  time.  Jerome  had  written  no  tracts 
from  which  charges  could  be  drawn.  One  hundred  and  seven 
charges  based  on  the  testimony  of  witnesses  recited  how,  as 
a  young  man,  he  had  sucked  in  the  poison  of  Wyclifism  at 
Oxford  and  had  carried  Wyclif's  writings  to  Bohemia,  where 
he  had  circulated  them.  He  had  placed  on  the  walls  of  his 
room  a  portrait  of  the  Englishman  with  his  head  surrounded 
with  the  aureole,  the  mark  of  sainthood.  He  was  a  close 
friend  of  Huss.  As  a  chief  actor,  he  had  taken  part  in  the 
Hussite  tumults  in  Prague  and  at  the  university.  He  had 
also  expressly  declared  that  the  Greeks  and  Ruthenians  were 
good  Christians. 

May  23,  1416,  had  been  appointed  as  the  day  when  Jerome 
should  do  final  penance  at  a  public  session  of  the  council. 
In  the  meantime,  as  was  to  be  the  case  with  archbishop 
Cranmer,  one  hundred  and  forty  years  later,  the  prisoner's 
courage  revived,  and,  instead  of  doing  penance,  he  laid  down 
a  testimony  to  his  highest  regard  for  Wyclif  and  Huss  and 
to  the  injury  which  had  been  done  in  condemning  them. 
Huss  was  a  pure  man  and  a  righteous  preacher  of  the  Gospel. 
He  was  ready  to  assert  until  death  all  the  articles  against  the 
offenses  and  pomp  of  the  prelates  which  Wyclif  and  Huss  had 
stated.  In  his  previous  profession  against  them  he  had  been 
guilty  of  falsehood. 

The  council,  meeting  in  the  cathedral,  May  30,  for  its 
twenty-first  session,  pronounced  sentence  upon  the  heretic. 
The  sermon  was  again  preached  by  the  bishop  of  Lodi.  The 
text,  Mark  16  :  14,  ran:  ''The  Lord  upbraided  them  with 
their  unbeUef  and  hardness  of  heart."  Unless  heretics  re- 
canted, he  said,  they  were  to  be  rooted  up.  Jerome,  after 
he  had  abjured,  had  returned  like  a  dog  to  his  vomit.    Ascend- 


324  JOHN  HUSS 

ing  a  bench,  Jerome  made  an  eloquent  defense,  a  most  graphic 
report  of  which  we  have  from  an  eye-witness,  Poggio  Brac- 
ciolini,  the  ItaHan  humanist  and  historian  of  Florence.  He 
denied  that  he  held  heretical  articles  and  in  his  closing  words 
cited  his  judges  to  appear  in  his  presence  at  the  bar  of  the 
most  high  and  righteous  Judge,  at  the  same  time  predicting 
that  in  the  meantime  his  memory  would  plague  their  con- 
sciences. The  holy  synod  then  pronounced  him  a  follower 
of  WycHf  and  Huss,  a  rotten  and  withered  branch — palmitem 
putridum  et  aridum — to  be  cut  off  from  the  church  and  de- 
livered to  the  secular  arm  to  receive  the  vengeance  due  the 
crime  of  heresy.  A  cap  was  placed  on  his  head  painted  with 
red  devils.  The  ceremony  of  presenting  him  a  chalice  was 
not  repeated,  for  he  was  a  laic. 

The  condemned  man  went  forth  from  the  church  with 
cheerful  countenance,  singing  the  creed  and  the  litany  on  the 
way  to  the  place  of  execution.  The  stake  was  reared  on  the 
spot  where  Huss  had  suffered.  He  kissed  it,  and  when  his 
garments  were  removed,  the  wood  and  straw  were  heaped  up 
to  his  chin  which  was  covered  with  a  heavy  beard.  The  flames 
were  slow  in  putting  an  end  to  his  misery  when  compared 
with  Huss.  Jerome  addressed  the  people,  professing  his  faith 
in  the  Apostles'  Creed  and  saying  that  he  died  for  refusing  to 
profess  to  the  council  that  Huss  had  been  justly  condemned. 
On  the  contrary,  he  knew  Huss  was  a  true  preacher  of  the  Gos- 
pel. As  he  was  dying,  he  chanted  the  Easter  hymn.  Hail,  Holy 
Day — Salve  festa  dies.  After  saying,  "Lord,  into  thy  hands  I 
commend  my  spirit,"  he  exclaimed  in  Bohemian:  ''Almighty 
Lord  God,  have  mercy  upon  me  and  forgive  my  sins,  for  thou 
knowest  that  I  love  thee  sincerely."  His  clothes  were  cast 
into  the  flames  and  the  remains  of  his  body  carted  off  to  the 
lake.  According  to  Richental,  many  learned  people  wept  that 
Jerome  had  to  die,  for  they  thought  he  was  almost  more 
learned  than  Huss.^ 

*  Richental,  p.  83,  says  that  Jerome  cried  out  terribly — grdulich — while  he 
was  being  burned,  for  "he  was  a  large,  strong  man." 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     325 

A  great  bowlder  now  marks  the  place  where  Jerome  and 
Huss  died,  bearing  their  names  with  the  simple  date  of  their 
death.  Burned  on  the  same  site,  and  companions  in  life,  they 
were  commemorated  in  Bohemia  as  witnesses  together  for 
the  Gospel  and  as  glorious  martyrs.  They  were  painted  as 
saints  on  the  walls  of  churches  and  a  Hussite  liturgy  of  1491 
put  them  side  by  side  with  Stephen  and  St.  Lawrence.^  To 
quote  again  that  elegant  writer,  ^neas  Sylvius,  Huss  and 
Jerome  were  regarded  among  the  Bohemians  as  deserving 
the  honors  paid  to  martyrs  and  were  held  in  no  less  honor 
in  Prague  than  Paul  and  Peter  among  the  Romans. 

Poggio's  account  of  Jerome's  last  address  contained  in  his 
letter  addressed  to  Leonardo  Aretino  is  a  piece  of  elegant 
literature  often  quoted.^  Poggio  opens  his  letter  by  saying 
that  he  was  moved  to  give  a  description  of  Jerome's  trial  and 
death  on  account  of  the  solemnity  of  the  occasion  and 
chiefly  on  account  of  the  man's  eloquence  and  doctrinal 
teaching.  The  following  statement  gives  the  substance  of 
this  remarkable  document: 

He  confessed — so  Poggio  wrote — that  he  had  never  seen  any  one 
who,  in  a  public  trial,  especially  for  a  capital  offense,  approached 
more  closely  to  the  standard  of  the  eloquence  of  the  ancients  which 
he  and  Aretino  so  much  admired.  It  was  wonderful  to  see  with 
what  words,  what  fluency  of  eloquence,  what  arguments,  what 
countenance  and  power  of  voice,  with  what  confidence  he  replied 
to  his  adversaries.  He,  Poggio,  was  not  concerned  to  pass  judg- 
ment upon  a  case  of  the  kind.  He  acquiesced  in  the  decision  of 
men  who  were  held  to  be  wiser  than  himself.  .  .  .  Jerome  reminded 
his  hearers  that  they  were  men  not  gods,  mortal  not  immortal, 
liable  to  mistake,  error,  deception  and  misinformation.    He  him- 

'  Schwab,  Gerson,  609.  Enemies  charged  that  Huss  was  "  placed  among 
the  holy  gods,"  Hardt,  6  :  181. 

^  See  Shepherd's  Life  of  Poggio.  The  letter  is  also  contained  in  Man.,  2  : 
532-534;  Doc,  624-629;  Hardt,  3  :  64-71;  Hefele,  7  :  280-283;  German  trsl., 
Palacky,  Gesch.,  386  sq.;  Engl,  trsl.,  Whitcomb,  Lit.  Source-Book  of  the  ltd. 
Renaissance,  40-47.  ^neas  Sylvius,  chap.  XXXVI,  refers  to  this  letter  as  the 
letter  of  "that  noble  writer,"  etc. 


326  JOHN  HUSS 

self  was  but  an  imperfect  man  under  trial  for  his  life.  He  advanced 
nothing  unworthy  of  a  good  man  as  though  he  felt  confident,  as 
he  also  publicly  asserted,  that  no  just  reason  could  be  found  for 
his  death.   .  .  . 

Many  persons  he  moved  with  humor,  many  with  satire,  many 
very  often  he  caused  to  laugh  in  spite  of  the  sad  affair,  jesting  at 
their  reproaches.  He  said  that  there  had  been  many  excellent 
men  who  had  suffered  for  their  virtues  and  been  oppressed  by 
false  witnesses  and  condemned  by  wicked  judges.  ...  He  took 
them  back  to  Socrates,  unjustly  condemned  by  his  fellow  citizens, 
who  did  not  shun  death  or  pain  when  he  might  have  avoided  both. 
He  mentioned  the  captivity  of  Plato,  the  flight  of  Anaxagoras,  the 
torture  of  Zeno,  and  the  unjust  condemnation  of  many  other 
pagans.  .  .  .  Thence  he  passed  to  the  Hebrew  examples,  first  call- 
ing up  Moses,  the  liberator  of  his  people,  Joseph,  sold  by  his  breth- 
ren, Isaiah,  Daniel,  Susanna.  .  .  .  Coming  down  to  John  the 
Baptist  and  then  to  the  Sa\'iour,  he  showed  how,  in  each  case,  they 
were  condemned  by  false  witnesses  and  false  judges.  .  .  .  Then 
he  took  up  Stephen,  killed  by  the  body  of  the  priests,  and  all  the 
Apostles,  condemned  to  death  as  popular  agitators  and  despisers  of 
the  gods.  ...  He  dwelt  at  length  upon  the  principle  that  such 
treatment  was  most  iniquitous  when  it  came  from  the  hand  of  a 
council  of  priests.  .  .  .  Then,  proceeding  to  praise  John  Huss,  who 
had  been  condemned  to  be  burned,  he  called  him  a  good  man, 
just  and  holy,  unworthy  of  such  a  death,  saying  that  he  himself 
was  prepared  to  go  to  any  punishment  whatsoever.  Huss  had 
never  held  opinions  hostile  to  the  church  of  God,  but  only  against 
the  abuses  of  the  clergy  and  the  pride,  the  arrogance  and  the 
pomp  of  prelates,  who  spent  their  patrimony,  not  on  the  poor 
but  on  mistresses,  boon  companions,  horses,  kennels  of  dogs  and 
other  things  imworthy  of  the  religion  of  Christ.  .  .  . 

He  displayed  the  greatest  cleverness,  for  when  his  address 
was  often  interrupted  with  various  disturbances,  he  left  no  one 
unscathed,  but  turned  trenchantly  upon  his  accusers  and  forced 
them  to  blush  or  to  keep  silent.  .  .  .  For  three  hundred  and  forty 
days  he  had  lain  in  the  bottom  of  a  foul,  dark  tower.  He  did  not 
complain  of  the  harshness  of  this  treatment  but  expressed  his 
wonder  that  such  inhumanity  could  be  shown.  In  the  dungeon, 
he  said,  he  had  not  only  no  facilities  for  reading,  but  none  for  see- 
ing. .  .  .  He  stood  there  fearless  and  unterrified,  not  alone  de- 
spising death,  but  seeking  it,  so  that  you  would  have  said  he  was  an- 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND   THE  HUSSITES     327 

other  Cato.  Oh,  man,  worthy  of  the  everlasting  memory  of  men ! 
I  praise  not  that  which  he  advanced,  if  anything  contrary  to  the 
institutions  of  the  church,  but  I  admire  his  learning,  his  eloquence, 
his  persuasiveness  of  speech,  his  adroitness  in  reply.  .  .  . 

Persevering  in  his  errors,  he  went  to  his  fate  with  joyful  and 
willing  countenance  for  he  feared  not  the  fire  nor  any  kind  of 
torture.  Never  did  any  Stoic  suffer  death  with  so  constant  and 
so  brave  a  mind  as  he  seems  to  have  sought  it.  When  he 
came  to  the  place  of  death  he  removed  his  clothes.  Then,  falling 
down  on  bended  knee,  he  greeted  the  stake.  When  the  flames 
were  started  he  began  to  sing  a  hymn,  which  the  smoke  and  the 
fire  interrupted.  When  the  executioner  wished  to  start  the  fire 
behind  his  back  that  he  might  not  see  it,  he  said:  "  Come  here  and 
light  it  in  front  of  me,  under  my  eye,  for  if  I  had  feared  the  fire 
I  would  never  have  come  to  this  place,  for  I  had  the  opportunity 
to  flee."  In  this  way  this  man,  excellent  except  in  respect  of  the 
faith,  was  burned.  I  have  seen  his  death  and  examined  into  his 
several  acts.  Not  Mutius  himself  suffered  his  arm  to  burn  with 
so  high  a  courage  as  this  man  his  whole  body.  Not  did  Socrates 
so  willingly  drink  the  poison  as  this  man  received  the  fire. 

One  of  the  tasks  the  council  had  set  for  itself  was  ac- 
complished. The  best  it  knew  to  do  against  heresy,  it  had 
done.  Wyclif's  writings  were  condemned  and  his  bones 
ordered  dug  up  from  their  quiet  resting-place  in  the  parish 
churchyard  of  Lutterworth  lest  the  earth  be  longer  defiled 
by  them:  and  the  Bohemian  teachers,  Huss  and  Jerome,  who 
followed  him  of  England,  were  silenced  in  death.  Strange 
that  such  acts  could  have  been  thought  of,  much  more  had 
unanimous  approval  in  a  Christian  council  and  that  there  are 
any — if  indeed  there  be  any — who  would  give  them  their 
approval  to-day.  The  feeling  expressed  by  the  text  "Thy 
brother's  blood  crieth  unto  me  from  the  ground,"  which  the 
editor  put  on  the  title-page  of  the  large  edition  of  Huss's 
writings,  if  it  is  still  shared,  is  not  a  feeling  of  vengeance  for 
what  the  council  of  Constance  did,  but  a  feeling  that  due  re- 
spect should  be  accorded  to  the  memories  of  these  men  who 
were  honest  in  their  convictions,  pure  in   their   lives,  and 


A 


328  JOHN  HUSS 

depended  with  their  whole  heart  upon  Christ,  whom  they 
sought  to  honor. 

As  it  was  Huss's  solemn  hope  that  at  the  tribunal  of 
God  he  might  be  found  not  to  have  repudiated  a  single 
tittle  of  Christ's  law,  so,  following  St.  Jerome,  he  expressed 
the  wish  that,  as  an  old  man,  he  might  hold  the  faith  he 
had  been  taught  as  a  boy;  and  in  that  same  precious  faith 
he  wished  to  die,  even  as  every  child  of  predestination  wishes 
to  die.^  That  best  of  masters — optimus  magister — the  ad- 
dress Huss  often  applied  to  Christ — himself  had  suffered 
false  accusation  and  bitter  death.  The  disciple  is  not  above 
his  Lord. 

After  November  11,  141 7,  the  church  of  the  West  was 
again  under  one  head  by  the  election  of  Otto  Colonna — 
Martin  V,  to  whom  the  case  of  Huss  was  fully  known.  It 
had  been  committed  to  him  by  John  XXIII,  and  he  had 
pronounced  the  first  excommunication  against  the  dead 
heretic.  One  of  Martin's  first  acts,^  February  22,  1418,  after 
the  council's  dissolution  was  the  reiterated  condemnation 
of  the  articles  brought  against  Wyclif  and  Huss  and  the 
excommunication  of  all  of  both  sexes  who  persisted  in  the 
pestilential  doctrines  of  those  heresiarchs  and  Jerome  of 
Prague.  Martin  also  called  upon  all  men  to  seize  the  heretics, 
put  them  in  chains  and  proceed  against  them  with  civil 
penalties. 

In  Bohemia,  serious  dissensions  broke  out  in  the  ranks  of 
Huss's  followers,  which  resulted  in  the  development  of  two 
wings,  the  Taborites,  who  settled  at  Tabor  with  John  Ziska 
as  leader,  and  the  Calixtines  or  Utraquists,  so  called  from  the 
fact  that  they  distributed  the  calix  or  chalice  to  the  laity  at 
the  Lord's  Supper.  The  city  of  Tabor  was  built  near  the  site 
of  Austi,  the  castle  where  Huss  spent  most  of  his  semi-volun- 
tary exile  from  Prague.  The  location,  sixty-eight  miles  south 
of  the  capital  city,  was  well  adapted  to  be  a  stronghold,  and 

'Mon.,  I  :  325,  330.  '^  Mirbt,  170-172. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     329 

the  streets  were  so  laid  out  that  an  army  penetrating  through 
the  walls  could  not  see  from  one  end  of  them  to  the  other. 
Founded  in  141 9,  the  city  still  exists  and  has  a  museum  con- 
taining many  objects  of  interest  dating  from  the  Hussite  wars 
and  fronted  by  a  bronze  statue  of  Ziska,  the  sturdy,  one-eyed 
Taborite  soldier.  The  city  has  a  small  Protestant  church, 
recently  built,  which  reminds  the  visitor  that  the  whole 
region  round  about,  now  Catholic,  once  resounded  to  the 
Hussite  hymns  and  witnessed  the  simple  ceremonies  of  their 
Puritan  faith.  The  Taborites  were  the  rigorous  party,  going 
even  to  a  fanatical  extreme.  The  CaHxtines,  more  conserva- 
tive and  finally  contenting  themselves  with  the  use  of  the  cup 
and  the  free  use  of  the  Scriptures,  were  largely  confined  to 
the  city  of  Prague.^ 

Early  in  141 7,  the  university,  taking  note  of  this  dis- 
sension, and  led  by  Jacobellus  of  Mies,  Christian  of  Prachaticz 
and  John  of  Reinstein,  all  friends  of  Huss,  condemned  the 
party  of  the  Hussites  who  were  denying  purgatory,  prayers 
for  the  dead,  who  banished  images  from  the  church,  abandoned 
the  use  of  candles,  incense,  the  ringing  of  bells  and  consecrated 
baptismal  water,  who  refused  judicial  oaths,  demanded  the 
mass  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  and  that  only  such  ceremonies 
be  practised  as  were  distinctly  set  forth  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. These  errors  and  others  were  set  forth  in  twenty-three 
articles  issued  by  a  council  of  the  masters  and  clergy  of  Prague 
a  year  and  a  half  later.  The  term  Taborites  is  not  used,  al- 
though that  party  was  meant.^ 

The  theological  faculty  further  formulated  the  Hussite 
doctrine  in  four  articles  which  demanded  free  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  the  administration  of  both  elements  in  the  Lord's 
Supper,  the  deprivation  of  clergymen  possessed  of  riches  and 

*  ^neas  Sylvius,  who  gives  a  vivid  description  of  Tabor,  which  he  visited, 
says  the  inhabitants  called  themselves  "Brethren  of  Tabor,  just  as  if  with  the 
three  disciples  they  had  seen  Christ  the  Saviour  on  the  Mount  of  Trans- 
figuration."— Hist.  Boh.,  chap.  XL. 

2  Z?oc.,  654-656,  667-681. 


330  JOHN  HUSS 

the  removal  of  priests  with  mortal  sins.  Between  these  two 
parties  the  nobles  were  divided,  but,  following  the  university, 
Cenek  of  Wartemberg,  Lacek  of  Krawar  and  other  nobles, 
ordered  all  clergymen  on  their  domains  to  distribute  the  cup 
on  pain  of  losing  their  places  and  induced  the  suffragan-bishop 
of  Prague  to  give  ordination  to  a  number  of  Hussites. 

The  council  of  Constance  was  not  slow  in  meeting  this 
new  rebellion  by  declaring  the  ordination  invalid,  and  Gerson 
opposed  to  it  his  tract  against  the  distribution  of  the  cup, 
in  which  he  called  upon  the  church  to  depend  less  upon  moral 
methods  and  more  upon  the  secular  authority  in  enforcing 
the  council's  act.^ 

Affairs  entered  into  a  new  stage  at  the  sudden  death  of 
that  unfortunate  monarch,  Wenzel,  August  i6,  1419.  A  year 
before,  he  had  resisted  Martin  V  by  forbidding  heretics  to 
appear  in  the  court  of  the  cardinal-inquisitor  whom  Martin 
had  sent  to  Bohemia.  The  council  had  passed  twenty-four 
articles  calling  upon  the  king  to  protect  the  church  in  all  its 
regulations  and  to  reinstate  clergymen  who  had  been  de- 
prived of  their  livings,  to  burn  all  Hussite  writings  and  for- 
bid all  singing  of  Hussite  songs,  to  deliver  over  to  the  council 
such  leaders  of  heresy  as  Jacobellus,  John  of  Reinstein,  Jese- 
nicz.  Christian  of  Prachaticz,  Simon  of  Tissnow  and  Simon  of 
Rokyzan,  and  to  treat  all  laymen  taking  the  cup  as  heretics. 
Moved  by  these  demands  and  the  advice  of  Sigismund,  Wenzel 
proceeded  with  some  energy,  banished  John  of  Jesenicz  from 
the  city  and  ordered  the  old  priests  reinstated,  but  set  apart 
three  churches  for  the  Utraquists.  He  lived  long  enough  to 
see  the  interdict  lifted  from  the  city.^ 

Wenzel's  death  followed  upon  an  armed  disturbance  in 
the  streets  of  Prague.  Many  of  his  councillors  had  left  the 
court  rather  than  yield  to  the  measures  of  repression.  One 
of  these,  John  of  Ziska,  led  a  procession  to  the  old  town  hall 

•  Schwab,  604  sq. 

^  Doc,  682  sqq.    Palacky,  Gesch.,  410  sqq.     The  twenty-four  articles  also 
in  Hefele,  344  sq. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     331 

and  threw  out  of  the  windows  the  magistrates,  some  of  whom 
died  from  the  fall,  the  rest  being  despatched  by  the  mob. 
Prague  was  the  scene  of  rioting,  and  all  the  old  priests  were 
expelled  by  the  inflamed  Hussite  party.  The  Taborites, 
with  Ziska  and  Nicholas  of  Pistna  at  their  head,  marched 
against  the  city  and,  in  common  with  the  Utraquists,  resisted 
the  queen,  who  had  been  appointed  regent,  and  her  army, 
made  up  in  part  of  mercenaries.  Great  destruction  of  property 
followed.  Peace  was  arranged  by  Cenek  of  Wartemberg,  and 
the  Taborites  retired.  Sigismund,  the  heir  to  the  Bohemian 
throne,  was  rejected  by  the  nation  at  large,  and  civil  war  fol- 
lowed his  attempt  to  make  good  his  claim  to  the  crown. 
Hussite  preachers  stigmatized  him  as  the  dragon  of  the 
Apocalypse.  He  was  destined  not  to  enter  Prague  until  six 
months  before  his  death. 

The  country  of  Huss  was  now  destined  to  be  attacked 
by  five  crusades  proclaimed  one  after  the  other  by  Martin  V, 
beginning  with  1420.  They  were  summoned  against  the 
WycUfists,  Hussites  and  other  heretics.  The  atrocities  per- 
petrated were  great,  and  a  misfortune  of  no  less  proportions 
than  the  crusades  was  that  the  Taborite  and  CaUxtine  parties 
were  often  at  war  with  one  another.  Ziska  fell  1424.  The 
last  of  the  crusades,  1431,  was  preached  by  Cardinal  Julian 
Caesarini  in  Germany,  and  one  hundred  and  thirty  thousand 
troops  responded;  but  the  crusading  army,  under  the  lead  of 
Frederick  of  Brandenburg,  quailed  before  the  songs  and  shrank 
before  the  impetus  of  the  Hussite  troops  in  the  disastrous 
defeat  at  Tauss. 

A  third  stage  in  the  history  of  Hussitism  was  opened  with 
the  negotiations  entered  into  with  the  council  of  Basel  by 
the  Calixtine  and  Taborite  parties,  represented  respectively 
by  John  Rokyzan  and  Procopius  the  Great  as  leaders.  These 
delegates  insisted  upon  the  respectful  use  of  the  names  of 
WycHf  and  Huss  on  the  floor  of  the  synod  and  employed 
the  Bohemian  tongue  in  the  religious  services  held  in  their 


332  JOHN  HUSS 

own  lodgings.  The  deliberations  resulted  in  the  so-called 
Compactata,  four  articles,  whose  chief  stipulation  was  the 
right  of  the  Bohemians  to  distribute  the  cup  to  the  laity. 
These  compacts  were  afterward  set  aside  by  Pius  II,  1462, 
the  same  pontiff  who  set  aside  the  decree  of  Constance  de- 
claring the  authority  of  general  councils  final. 

Archbishop  Konrad,  who  had  identified  himself  with 
the  Calixtines,  died  in  143 1.  He  was  followed  by  Rokyzan, 
who  administered  the  archdiocese  of  Prague  until  his 
death,  147 1,  although  he  was  never  recognized  by  Rome. 
Sigismund,  who  died  1437,  was  followed  by  his  son-in-law, 
Albert  of  Austria.  In  1458  the  crown  went  to  George  Podie- 
brad,  a  Bohemian  nobleman  who  had  acted  for  several  years 
as  regent  under  Ladislaus  Postumus.  Podiebrad  was  the 
leader  of  the  Calixtine  party,  and  under  him  and  Rokyzan 
that  party  retained  its  strength  in  the  city.  The  king  had  to 
contend  against  Matthias  Corvinus  of  Hungary,  to  whom 
the  apostolic  see  had  transferred  the  Bohemian  crown.  In 
the  meantime  the  Calixtines  had  defeated  the  Taborites  at 
Lipan,  1434,  when  Procopius  and  13,000  of  his  followers 
fell.  Tabor  was  taken  by  Podiebrad,  1452.  The  king  died 
in  his  wars  with  Matthias,  147 1.  The  throne  then  passed 
to  the  house  of  Hapsburg.  By  various  agreements  the  Calix- 
tines were  confirmed  in  their  rights.  Not  only  Bohemia  and 
Moravia  but  also  adjoining  lands  were  largely  under  the 
influence  of  the  law  of  religious  liberty. 

A  third  party  grew  up  in  Bohemia  from  the  Hussite  stock, 
known  as  the  Bohemian  Brethren.  Its  exact  origin  is  a  matter 
of  dispute.  It  appears  distinctly  1457  and  seems  to  have 
had  some  connection  with  the  Austrian  Waldenses.  One  of 
the  earliest  of  the  Waldensian  leaders  was  Peter  Chelcicky, 
a  marked  religious  personage,  of  whom  we  would  like  to 
know  a  great  deal  more  than  we  do.  By  1500  these  dis- 
senters had  increased  to  200,000,  grouped  in  three  hundred 
or   more  congregations.      They  had   their  own  confession, 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND   THE  HUSSITES     333 

catechism  and  hymnology.  They  rejected  war  and  oaths. 
Brethren,  including  Michael  Weiss,  the  hymn-writer,  visited 
Luther,  who  at  an  early  date  had  in  his  hand  a  copy  of  their 
catechism. 

Under  Maximilian  II,  1 564-1 576,  there  was  a  fair  pros- 
pect of  all  Bohemia  and  the  German  provinces  of  Austria 
becoming  Protestant.  DolHnger  says  that  in  some  of  the 
provinces  nine-tenths  of  the  population  was  Protestant.  But 
later,  under  Ferdinand  II,  d.  1637,  who  had  been  brought 
up  under  strict  Jesuit  influences,  the  Hussites  endured  the 
bitterest  of  persecutions.  The  downfall  of  Bohemian  and 
Moravian  Protestantism  followed.  The  Jesuits,  who  had 
established  themselves  in  Austria,  were  indefatigable  in  their 
efforts  to  bring  about  this  result.  They  acted,  we  may  sup- 
pose, upon  the  judgment  which  Cochlaeus  set  forth,  that  there 
had  never  been  a  mortal  man  who  was  more  dangerous  and 
pestilential  to  Bohemia  than  Huss.^  By  moral  persuasion 
and  legislation,  by  confiscation  of  lands,  by  the  expulsion 
of  the  Protestant  population  and  by  its  extermination  with 
the  sword,  their  work  was  accomplished.  The  Protestant 
nobles  were  forbidden  by  law  to  have  preaching  even  in 
their  castles. 

The  Thirty  Years'  War,  which  began  with  the  revolt  of 
Bohemia  against  Ferdinand  II,  1618,  and  the  election  of 
Frederick  of  the  Palatinate  as  its  king,  not  only  left  Bohemia 
bleeding  but  Bohemian  Protestantism  to  all  appearances 
done  to  death.  In  the  battle  at  the  White  Mountain,  near 
Prague,  1620,  Frederick  was  completely  defeated,  and  with  his 
defeat  the  fate  of  Bohemian  Hussitism  was  sealed.  Twenty- 
seven  distinguished  Protestants  were  executed  on  the  pub- 
lic square,  near  the  spot  where  the  proposed  monument  to 
Huss  is  to  be  erected  in  191 5  by  the  subscription  of  Bohemians 
who  have  revived  the  memory  of  their  great  countryman 

•  Nullum  unquam  fuisse  mortalem  regno  Bohemia  nocentiorem  aid  pestilen- 
tiorem  quam  Hus,  p.  114. 


334  JOHN  HUSS 

burned  to  death  at  Constance,  whose  cause  the  ancestors  of 
so  many  of  them  defended  even  to  the  loss  of  their  lives. 

All  Protestant  teachers  and  preachers  were  given,  in  1624, 
a  week  to  leave  the  country  on  pain  of  death.  Bohemian 
and  German  Bibles  and  all  Bohemian  works  published  after 
1414  were  placed  under  the  suspicion  of  heresy  and  burned 
in  great  numbers  in  the  market-places  and  under  the  gallows. 
One  Jesuit,  Anton  Koniasch,  boasted  he  had  burned  60,000 
such  books.  Thus  the  Czech  literature  was  threatened  with 
utter  destruction.  Protestants  had  been  forbidden  all  rights 
— marriage,  worship,  merchandise  or  making  a  will.  Ferdi- 
nand's vow  to  exterminate  heretics,  if  in  doing  so  he  had 
to  rule  over  a  desert,  was  realized.  More  than  30,000 
famihes,  including  400  nobles,  emigrated,  and  the  Bohemian 
people,  which  at  the  beginning  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War 
numbered  between  3,000,000  and  4,000,000,  was  reduced  at 
its  close  to  700,000  or  800,000.  The  last  of  the  bishops  of 
the  Bohemian  Brethren,  Comenius,  died  in  exile  in  Holland, 
1670.  Hussites,  if  there  were  any  who  remained  in  Bohemia 
and  retained  their  ancient  faith,  kept  it  a  secret. 

The  Hussite  spirit  was  crushed  but  not  extinguished. 
Sparks  burned  again  and  turned  to  a  flame  in  the  Moravian 
church.  In  1722  two  Moravian  families,  led  by  Christian 
David,  settled  at  Herrnhut,  near  Dresden,  on  lands  set  apart 
by  Count  Zinzendorf .  From  that  spot  as  a  centre  this  humble 
body  of  sincere  Christians  has  illuminated  the  world  by  its 
missionary  devotion,  carrying  the  spirit  and  the  teachings 
of  Huss  to  regions  of  whose  existence  that  good  man  never 
dreamed,  even  to  the  remotest  ends  of  the  earth  and  the 
most  destitute  populations — the  islands  of  the  West  Indies, 
the  Mosquito  Coast,  Greenland  and  Labrador,  "the  natives  of 
Australia,  the  lepers  of  Jerusalem,  the  table-land  of  Thibet. 
The  sparks  of  the  old  Hussite  flame  also  began  to  show  signs 
of  life  in  Bohemia  itself  after  the  edicts  of  religious  tolera- 
tion issued  in  1781  and  1848.    At  present,  the  pastors  of  the 


— i. 


HUSS'S  WRITINGS  AND  THE  HUSSITES     335 

Evangelical  church  of  that  land,  given  larger  freedom  by 
the  law  of  1861,  are  most  faithful  and  active  and  find 
themselves  unable  for  lack  of  ministerial  force  and  financial 
equipment  to  take  advantage  of  the  opportunities  being 
offered  of  again  proclaiming  the  evangeHcal  faith  for  which 
Huss  died.  Among  the  Czech  people,  his  memory  is  again 
coming  to  honor.  His  spirit  still  moves  to  and  fro  across 
the  old  bridge  of  the  Moldau,  and  his  voice  may  yet  be 
heard  again  preaching  in  all  the  villages  of  his  native  land, 
Bohemia. 


APPENDIX   I 

CHRONOLOGICAL  LIST   OF   EVENTS   IN  HUSS'S   LIFE 
OR  BEARING  UPON  IT 

12 1 5.    Establishment  of  the  Inquisition  by  Innocent  III,  p.  8. 

1274.    Death  of  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  prince  of  the  Schoolmen,  p.  7. 

1302.    Boniface  VIII's  bull,  Unam  sanctam,  p.  4. 

1305-1378.    The  Avignon  exile  of  the  papacy,  p.  16. 

132 1.    Dante  died.    He  repudiated  Constan tine's  donation,  p.  10. 

1378-1417.    The  papal  schism,  p.  17. 

1382.    Anne  of  Bohemia  married  to  Richard  II,  p.  46. 

The  Earthquake  synod  in  London  condemns  24  articles  of 

Wyclif. 
1384.    John  Wyclif  dies,  pp.  48  sqq. 
1346-1378.    Charles  IV,  king  of  Bohemia,  p.  24. 
1369.    Konrad  of  Waldhausen  dies;  Milicz  of  Kremsier,  d.  1374; 

Mathias  of  Janow,  d.  1394,  pp.  28-33. 
1373.    Huss  born,  p.  19. 
1389.    Huss  enters  the  university  of  Prague;  B.  A.,  1393;  B.  D., 

1394;  M.  A.,  1396,  p.  20. 
J401.    Huss  ordained  priest,  p.  20. 

1402.  Huss  preacher  at  Bethlehem  chapel,  p.  27;   rector  of  the 

university,  p.  21. 

1403.  The  XLV  Articles  of  Wyclif  forbidden  by  the  university 

to  be  taught,  p.  54. 
Zbynek,  archbishop  of  Prague,  p.  59. 
1405.    Huss  appointed  to  investigate  the  holy  blood  of  Wylsnack, 
pp.  64  sq. 
Innocent,  addressed  by  the  Prague  clergy,  calls  upon  Zby- 
nek to  proceed  against  Wyclifite  errors,  p.  68. 
1408?    Huss  writes  Com.  on  the  Sentences  of  the  Lombard,  p.  305. 

Welemowicz  and  Knin  tried  for  Wyclif.  heresy,  p.  69. 
1409.     Charter  of  the  university  of  Prague  changed,  pp.  78  sqq. 
Huss  rector  of  the  university,  p.  83. 

The  Reformatory  council  of  Pisa  meets  and  elects  Alex- 
ander V,  pp.  85  sq.  J 
337 


> 


338  APPENDIX 

Alexander  V  instructs  Zbynek  to  proceed  against  Wyclif- 
ism,  p.  87. 
1410.    Wyclif' s  books  publicly  burned,  p.  91. 

Huss  publicly  defends  Wyclif,    Is  excommunicated,  p.  92. 
Huss  appeals  to  John  XXIII,  p.  97. 
i  ^.  Huss  cited  to  Rome  by  Cardinal  Colonna,  p.  99. 

l^'^^- 1'  141 1.    Huss  excommunicated  by  the  Roman  curia,  p.  100. 

I  .Huss  has  controversy  with  John  Stokes,  p.  108. 

Pact  of  peace  between  Zbynek  and  the  university,  July  3, 

p.  102, 
Zbynek  dies.   Albik  of  Unizow,  archbishop  of  Prague,  105  sqq. 

141 2.  John  XXIII's  bulls  of  indulgences  announced  in  Prague, 

pp.  Ill  sqq. 
Wok  of  Waldstein's  procession,  123  sq. 
Execution  of  Stafcon,  Martin,  and  John,  p,  124. 
Interdict  against  Prague,  136  sq. 
Huss's  withdrawal  from  Prague,  pp.  133  sqq. 
Last  bull  against  Huss,  p.  140. 
Huss  appeals  to  Christ,  p.  138. 

1413.  Huss  writes  the  Treatise  on  the  Church,  p.  305. 
Palecz,  Stanislaus,  etc.,  banished  from  Prague,  p.  154. 

1414.  Huss  starts  for  Constance.    Arrives  there  November  3, 

pp.  165  sqq. 
Huss  imprisoned  by  the  cardinals,  November  28,  p.  176. 
Huss  in  the  Dominican  prison,  December  6,  p.  179. 
Sigismund  arrives  in  Constance,  December  25,  p.  185. 

1415.  Huss  in  prison  at  Gottlieben,  March  24,  p.  195. 
John  XXIII  deposed,  pp.  192  sqq. 

Huss  transferred  to  the  prison  of  the  Franciscans,  June  5, 

p.  203. 
Huss's  public  hearings  in  the  Franciscan  friary,  June  5,  7, 

8,  p.  204. 
Huss  writes  to  the  university  of  Prague,  June  27,  p.  247. 
Huss  condemned  as  a  heretic  and  burned,  July  6,  p.  253, 256. 

1.415.    Four  hundred  and  fifty-two  Bohemian  and  Moravian  nobles 
agree  to  protect  free  preaching,  September  5,  p.  315. 
Jerome  recants  in  the  cathedral  of  Constance,  September  23, 

P-  323-  ^ 

1416.  Jerome  dies  at  the  stake.  May  30,    p.  325. 

1417.  The  university  of  Prague  decides  for  the  cup,  p.  329. 


APPENDIX  339 

1418.  Council  of  Constance  adjourns,  p.  328. 

1419.  Wenzel,  king  of  Bohemia,  dies  August  16,  p.  330. 
1420-1431.    Five  Crusades  against  the  Hussites  defeated,  p.  331. 
1424.    John  of  Ziska  falls  in  battle,  p.  331. 

1433.    The  Compactata  granted  by  the  council  of  Basel,  p.  332. 
1437.    Sigismund  dies,  p.  332. 

15 19.  Luther  openly  acknowledges  Huss  as  a  good  man  at  Leipzig, 

p.  292. 
Luther  receives  a  copy  of  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church, 
p.  293. 

1520.  Huss's  Treatise  on  the  Church  printed  at  Wittenberg,  p.  294.  ) 
1536- 1537.    Three  editions  of  some  of  Huss's  works  prefaced  by  1 

Luther,  p.  294. 
1620.    The  battle  of  the  White  Mountain,  p.  333. 
1722.    Moravians  settle  at  Herrnhut  on  the  estates  of  Count 

Zinzendorf,  p.  334. 
1732.    The  Moravians  begin  their  mission^  at  St.  Thomas. 
1770.     Martin  Mack  ordained  Moravian  bishop  at  Bethlehem, 

Pa.,  the  first  bishop  ordained  within  the  limits  of  the 

United  States. 
1779.    The  English  Parliament  recognizes  the  Moravians  as  "an 

ancient  episcopal  church." 
1781,  1848,  1861.    By  the  edicts  of  toleration,  Hussitism  becomes 

active  again  in  Bohemia,  p.  334. 

Popes  during  the  Papal  Schism,  1378-1417 


THE   ROMAN   LINE 

Urban  VI,  1378-1389. 

Boniface  IX,  1389-1404. 

Innocent  VII,  1404-1406. 

Gregory  XII  (Angelo  Correr), 
elected  1406;  deposed  at  Pisa, 
1409;  resigned  at  Constance, 
1415;  d.  1417. 


AVIGNON   LINE 

Clement  VII,  1378-1394. 

Benedict  XIII  (Peter  de  Luna), 
elected  1394;  deposed  at  Pisa, 
1409;  deposed  at  Constance, 
1417;  d.  1424. 


THE  riSAN  LINE 

Alexander  V,  1409,  14 10. 
John  XXIII,  1410;  deposed  at  Constance, 
1415;  d.  1419. 


Martin  V,  1417-1431;  elected  at  Constance  and  recognized  by  all 
Western  Christendom. 


APPENDIX   II 

A   SPURIOUS   ACCOUNT   OF   HUSS'S   JOURNEY  TO 
CONSTANCE  AND  TRIAL 

Under  the  title,  The  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  at  the  Council  of 
Constance  and  Huss's  Trial,  Sentence,  and  Death  at  the  Stake, 
written  by  a  member  of  the  council,  PoGius,  Prior  of  St.  Nik- 
LASEN,^  an  interesting  but  spurious  description  is  given  of  incidents 
in  Huss's  journey  and  his  trial  on  July  6  in  the  cathedral  of  Con- 
stance, which  differs  materially  from  the  accredited  authorities. 
So  far  as  it  can  be  traced,  the  booklet  appeared  first  at  Reutlingen, 
Wiirtemberg,  1846.  A  reprint  was  issued  in  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1875, 
five  years  after  the  proclamation  of  the  dogma  of  papal  infalli- 
bility. The  Reutlingen  edition  purported  to  be  a  reprint  of  an 
original  edition  said  to  have  appeared  at  Constance,  and  contains 
on  its  title-page  the  statement,  erstmals  gedruckt  1523  zu  Costnitz — 
originally  printed  at  Constance,  1523.  The  volume  contains  two 
letters  written  in  a  most  graphic  style  by  Pogius,  who  represents 
himself  as  haying  accompanied  Huss  from  Prague  to  Constance 
and  as  having  undergone  a  change  from  an  enemy  of  the  heretic 
to  a  warm  partisan.  The  route  he  represents  Huss  as  having  taken 
differs  from  the  route  as  laid  down  in  Huss's  letters  and  by  Mlade- 
nowicz. 

The  description  Pogius  gives  of  the  sitting  of  the  council  in 
the  cathedral  of  Constance,  July  6,  when  Huss  was  condemned, 
contains  the  startling  statement  that  the  verdict  of  heresy  was 
not  unanimous.  On  the  contrary,  according  to  Pogius,  it  was  re- 
sisted by  a  number  of  bishops,  whose  addresses  of  dissent  he  pro- 
fesses to  give.    The  most  of  these  dissenting  prelates  were  Ger- 

*  Die  Unfeklbarkeit  des  Papstes  auf  d.  Condi  zu  Constanz  und  J.  Huss's  Ver- 
hor,  Venirtheiliing  und  Feuerlod  (5.  mid  6.  Juli,  1415)  geschr.  von  dent  Concils- 
Mitgliede,  Pogius,  Prior  zu  Niklasen.  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1875.  For  an  elaborate 
notice  of  the  booklet  and  its  contents,  with  letters  from  Loserth  and  Prof. 
Miiller  of  Tubingen,  see  my  article  in  Amer.  Journal  of  Theology,  Ap.,  1915. 

341 


342  APPENDIX 

mans,  but  Vincent  Ferrer,  the  Spaniard,  also  voted  with  the 
minority. 

The  volume  is  evidently  a  forgery,  and  contradicts  Huss's 
letters,  Mladenowicz's  account,  the  documents  in  Van  der  Hardt, 
and  the  statements  of  Gerson,  d'Ailly,  and  other  accredited  sources. 
There  is  no  evidence  of  the  booklet's  having  been  in  existence  be- 
fore the  ReutHngen  edition  appeared.  The  term  Costnitz,  which 
is  Slavic,  was  not  used  for  Constance  by  the  Germans.  The  name 
Pogius,  the  author,  was  evidently  meant  to  conceal  the  forgery  by 
its  resemblance  to  "Poggius,"  the  Italian  humanist,  who  wrote 
the  brilliant  account  of  Jerome's  trial  and  death  at  the  stake. 
Poggius's  public  career  and  personal  habits  are  out  of  accord  with 
what  Pogius  tells  about  himself. 

The  motive  of  the  forgery  is  a  matter  of  conjecture,  whether 
it  was  by  a  Catholic  to  remove  the  odium  from  the  church  arising 
from  the  unanimous  verdict  against  Huss,  or  by  a  Protestant  to 
serve  as  a  burlesque  on  the  alleged  sacredness  of  the  council  which 
voted  down  teachings  of  Scripture  in  condemning  Huss  and,  at  the 
same  time,  liberty  of  thought  in  religious  matters. 

The  difficulty  of  burying  a  book  after  it  has  once  been  put  into 
print  is  afforded  by  this  booklet,  which  has  recently  been  reprinted 
in  Berlin  to  further  the  interest  in  the  Huss  anniversary  of  1915, 
even  as  the  story  of  Luther's  violent  death  is  every  now  and  then 
republished,  lie  though  it  is. 


INDEX 


Aachen,  relics  of,  67 

Absolution  a  poena  et  culpa,  117,  156 

Adalbert  of  Prague,  23,  35 

Adalbert  Ranconis,  29 

Address  to  the  German  Nobility,  66, 133, 
288,  294 

/Eneas  Sylvius :  On  Huss  and  Jerome, 
21,  27,  270,329;  History  of  Bohemia, 
25;  Wenzel,  76;  Prague  university, 
82;  Sigismund,  163;  the  cup,  202; 
Tabor,  329.     Also,  47,  56,  91,  iii, 

163,325- 
Against  the  Hidden  Adversary,  134 
Agnes,  papissa,  279 
Albik,  107,  113,  143,  153 
Alexander  V,  77,  85,  97,  iii,  130,  210 
Alexander  VI,  191 
Alexander  of  Hales,  114,  200 
Alexander  Triumphus,  11 
Alvarus  Pelayo,  11 
Ananias,  129,  131 
Anathema,  128,  136,  137,  141,  151 
Andrew  of  Broda,  43,  125,  167 
Andrew  of  Prague,  138 
Andrew  the  Pole,  234 
Angelo  Correr.    See  Gregory  XII. 
Anne  of  Luxemburg,  46,  no 
Anselm,  206 
Antichrist,  86,  115 
Apostolic  mandates,  114,  127,  283 
Appeal  to  Christ,  138,  210,  215,  231, 

251 
Arius,  91,  158 
Amest  of  Pardubicz,  59  sq. 
Arnold  of  Brescia,  304 
Athanasius,  58,  149 
Augustine,  39,  94,  117,  131,  149,  216 
Avignon  exile,  16,  50,  73 


Barbara,  St.,  29 

Barbatus,  258 

Benedict  XIII,  73,  162,  174,  193,  229 

Berengar,  211 

Berger,  54,  82,  85,  285,  291 

Bernard,  St.,  117,  130 

Bethlehem  chapel  founded,  22  sq.,  26, 
40,  44,  70,  73,  89,  90,  98,  114,  124, 
125,  140,  148,  150,  156;  Huss's  love 
for,  238-240 

Biberach,  170 

Bible,  Huss  and,  3955.,  98,  118,  144, 
178,  180,  197,  214,  220,  247,  268, 
282-284,  301-  Also,  32,  40,  46, 
51,  52,  57,  59,  95,  127, 132, 140,  201, 
226,  284 

Bishop-sup-with-the-devil,  166,  197 

Black  Friars,  179 

Blood,  holy,  64,  67 

Boccaccio,  14 

Bohemia,  culture  of,  i ;  and  the  papal 
schism,  17;  religious  history,  23;  and 
Wyclif,  69  sq.;  orthodox,  70, 143  sq., 
154,199;  Huss's  "  fatherland,"  237; 
divided  on  Huss,  140,  312-315 

Bohemian  Brethren,  332 

Bohemian  nobles,  petitions  and  pacts 
of,  238,  242,  286,  315 

Bologna,  44,  45 

Boniface  VIII,  4,  6,  8,  10,  16,  162,  280 

Boniface  IX,  128,  152,  236,  279 

Books  burned,  91  sqq.,  159,  24553.,  252 

Borivoj,  23 

Bossuet,  77,  249 

Brancas,  Cardinal,  loi 

Briinn,  197,  198 

Bryce,  24 

Buddensieg,  272 


Baltenhagen,  75 
Balthasar  Cossa. 


See  John  XXIII. 


Caesar  Heisterbach,  5,  67 
Cain's  curse,  136 


343 


344 


INDEX 


Cajetan,  177 

Calixtines,  328  sq. 

Calvin,  11,  22,  44,  226,  264,  268 

Carranza,  199 

Catherine  of  Siena,  17 

Catherine,  St.,  222 

Ceneii  of  Wartemberg,  312,  316,  317, 

331 

Chapels  dosed,  90,  130 

Charles  IV,  i,  24,  28,  30,  31,  44,  75, 
102,  134,  184 

Charles  V,  252 

Charles  VI,  165 

Charles  of  Durazzo,  iii 

Chelcicky,  332 

Chlum,  John  of,  165,  167,  170,  174  sq., 
jjg  sqq.,  184,  188,  197,  20455'.,  228, 
237,  241  sq.,  247 

Chotek,  140 

Christ's  example,  118;  kingdom,  119; 
sufferings,  150,  240,  242;  Huss's  ap- 
peal to,  138,  158;  best  of  masters, 
328 

Christmas  sermon,  40 

Chrysostom,  69,  94,  138,  293 

Church  and  empire,  4,  5 

Church  defined,  7,  15,  36,  52,  117,  144, 
152,  154,  273,  275-277,  307 

Church,  Treatise  on  the,  27,  36,  96,  99, 
116,  124,  132,  138,  14s,  156,  175, 
184,  204,  213,  214,  252,  265,  293  sq., 
299,  306  sq. 

Clement  VII,  17,  74,  113,  137 

Clerical  morak,  60,  63,  70,  71,  134 

Cochlaeus,  51,  82,  293,  303 

Coelestin  V,  192 

Colonna,  Cardinal,  97,  99,  100,  135 

Comenius,  334 

Compactata,  332 

Conradin,  112 

Conscience,  116,  208,  222  sq.,  226,  254, 
296-302 

Constance,  14,  18,  56,  122;  Huss's 
going  to,  167  sqq. 

Constance,  council  of,  161  sqq.,  172; 
tries  Huss,  183  sqq.,  226;  condemns 
Huss  253,  318  5^.;  condemns  Wyclif, 
202;  acts  in  accordance  with  the 
principles  of  the  age,  269  sq. 

Constantino's  donation,  10,  55,  214 


Councils,  162-165;   Huss  on,  2^4  sq., 

237 
Courtenay,  49,  50 
Cracow,  79 

Creighton,  Bishop,  267 
Cruciata,  113 

Crusades,  2,  112,  121,  130,  331 
Cup,  the,  200,  243  sq.,  332 
Cyprian,  ^     ,  306 
Cyrillus,  23 
Czech  language,  23,  34,  304 

D'Ailly,  14,  85, 162, 173, 193, 195,  204, 
206,  208,  210,  214,  216,  221,  222, 

225,     230,     234,    247,    263,    265,    269, 
322 

Dante,  10,  14,  52 

Denifle,  264 

De  sanguine  Christi,  65 

Deutschbrod.    See  Michael  de  Causis 

Didacus,  178 

Bollinger,  7,  9,  279 

Duns  Scotus,  8 

Diirer,  142 

Earthquake  council,  54,  209,  290 

Eckart,  12 

Eight  doctors,  the,  107,  12655.,  ^3°> 

133,  3°o,  305 
Erasmus,  14,  159,  266 
"  Evangehcal  clergy,"  147 
Execrabilis,  bull,  163 

Faith,  129,  131,  156 

Father,  the,  205,  231 

Faulfisch,  47,  68,  224 

Ferdinand  of  Aragon,  187 

Ferdinand  of  Austria,  193 

Fida,  170,  174,  176 

Fillastre,  173 

Finke,  165 

Flajshans,  2,  19,  20,  28,  34,  45,  57,  59, 

65,  181;   on  Huss,  259,  260,  305 
Fourth  Lateran,  8,  161,  251 
Franciscan  convent,  195,  203,  213 
Frederick  Barbarossa,  6 
Frederick  II,  6,  9,  112,  141 
Frederick  the  Wise,  141 
Friedberg,  245 
Funk,  II,  161 


INDEX 


345 


Gee  and  Hardy,  49,  54,  156 
Gelnhausen,  Konrad  of,  162 
Germans   at   Prague,    77,   7g  sq.,   80, 

82  sq.,  103,  140,  155,  206,  212,  261 
Gerson,  14,  19,  57,  77,  107,  157,  162, 

174,  184,  193,  201,  208,  227,  243, 

263,  265,  269,  297,  300,  322 
Giczin,  91,  125 
Gieseler,  258 

Gillett,  19,  181,  213,  252 
Glux,  Hertonk  von,  108 
Golden  Bull,  24 
Goll,  322 

Goose,  19,  150,  182,  189,  258 
Gottlieben,  194  sq.,  202,  210,  256 
Gottschick,  292 
Gregorovius,  236 
Gregory  VII,  4,  6,  146,  162 
Gregory  XI,  17,  31,  49,  51 
Gregory  XII,  26,  70,  73  sqq.,  77, 86, 97, 

III  sq.,  162,  192,  220 
Grisar,  264 
Grosseteste,  67,  139 

Hallum,  Bishop,  173,  193,  218 

Hapsburg,  house  of,  24,  26 

Harasser,  56 

Harnack,  292 

Hawlik,  292 

Hefele,  22,  243,  258,  285,  290,  297,  330 

Helfert,  177,  303 

Henry  III,  162 

Henry  IV,  5,  23 

Heresiarch,  88,  252,  255 

Heresy  and  heretics,  no  right  to  live, 
8,  9,  87,  148,  249,  299;  name,  133, 
13s;  Husson,  63,  86,  107,  no,  129- 
132,  214,  298;  Huss  a  heretic,  145, 
159,  198,  202  sq.,  208,  226,  233,  265, 
268,  289 

Hergenrother,  Cardinal,  6,  11,  77, 

Hergenrother,  P.,  136 

Hofler,  79,  82,  83 

Hradschin,  24,  26 

Humanists,  13  sq.,  140 

Huss,  student,  priest,  preacher,  18,  22, 
27,  38-42;  leader,  $Ssqq.,  134;  pu- 
rity of  hfe,  264, 316;  physical  quali- 
ties, 58;  opinion  of  himself,  239, 
241;     and    money,    188;     charges 


against,  70,  go  sqq.,  205  sqq.,  250 
sqq.;  cited  to  Rome,  99;  excom- 
municated, 92,  100,  135,  266  sqq.; 
a  heretic,  140,  152,  189,  225,  233, 
248,  252,  255,  257,  298,  318;  son  of 
iniquity,  123;  Wyclifist,  135,  272; 
and  indulgences,  111  sq.,  114,  116- 
122;  exile,  142  sqq.;  and  the  eight 
doctors,  145  sqq.;  appeals  to  Christ, 
138 sqq.;  210,  215,  231,  242,  251; 
looks  forward  to  death,  140,  246, 
151  sq.;  called  upon  to  abjure, 
228  sq.,  230,  232,  247,  248;  con- 
demned and  burned,  228,  252-256; 
delivered  up  to  the  devil,  255;  let- 
ters, 149,  182,  229;  and  the  cup, 
200,  243  sq.;  and  conscience,  223, 
254,  296-302;  and  the  Bible,  39, 
241,  247,  254,  266;  on  the  council 
of  Constance,  268,  289;  and  Wychf, 
IS,  33,  43  sqq.,  56,  71,  94,  126, 
2og  sq.,  272,  308  sq.;  and  the  Prot- 
estant Reformation,  15  sq.,  273  sqq., 
291  sqq.;  place  in  history,  2,  260  sqq. 
See  Church,  Luther,  Pope,  Preach- 
ing, Sigismund,  Palecz,  etc. 

Hussite  cantionale,  295 

Hussites,  48, 83, 154, 163,  202,304  sqq.; 
crusades  against,  331 

Hymns  by  Huss,  310 

Indulgences,  20,  iiosq.,  119,  120  sq., 

124,  129  sq.,  271,  309 
Innocent  III,  4,  5,  8,  44,  87,  112,  144, 

161,  162,  299 
Innocent  IV,  6 
Innocent  VII,  68,  in 
Inquisition,  8,  147,  etc. 
Insul  hotel,  179 
Interdict,  i3gsqq.,  217 
Isidorian  decretals,  10 

Jacobellus,  33, 69, 93, 143, 147,  201  sq., 

243,  246 
Janow,  Matthias  of,  28,  31  sqq. 
Jaroslav,  69 
Jerome  of  Prague,  i,  47,  123,  189,  229, 

234,  241,  258,  270,  3^4  sq.,  321  sq., 

324 
Jerome,  St.,  115,  117 


346 


INDEX 


Jesenicz,  98,   135,   14053.,   143,  i53. 

166,  183  sq.,  189,  238,  312,  317,  319 
Jesuits,  240,  263,  S33,  334 
Joan  of  Arc,  268 
Joanna,  wife  of  Wenzel,  76,  262 
John  XII,  236,  282 
John  XXII,  11,12 
John  XXIII,  75,  86,  90,  96,  97,  103, 

107,  123,  127,  132,  13s,  139,  153, 

158,  162  sqq.,  171, 17s,  191  sqq.,  197, 

202,  218  sq.,  236,  281 
John  of  Austi,  142 
John  of  England,  6,  49 
John  of  Gorlitz,  76 
John  of  Jandun, 11,  50,  158 
John  of  Jenzenstein,  59,  62,  262 
John  of  Luxemburg,  i,  23 
John  of  Nassau,  173 
John  of  Nepornfuk,  26,  262 
John  of  Paris,  10 
John  of  Staupitz,  134 
Jost  of  Moravia,  88,  104 
Judas,  61,  63 

KaufEhaus,  171 

Kbel,  70 

Keys,  power  of,  126,  276,  282 

Kingdom  of  God,  39 

Knin,  69 

Knox,  John,  22,  44,  264 

Kohler,  303 

Kolin,  Stephen  of,  27,  34 

Konrad  of  Vechta,  107,  143,  157, 166, 

313-319 
Kugelgen,  82 

Labkowicz,  Nicolas  of,  80 
Lacek  of  Krawar,  98,  102,  312,  316 
Lacembok,  Henry  of,  165,  177 
Ladislaus  of  Naples,  iii  sq.,  121,  128, 

130,  132,  164,  191 
Langsdorff,  61,  62 
Latimer,  34 
Lea,  183,  267,  304 
Lechler,  266,  296 
Lecky,  302 
Lefl  of  Lazan,  155 
Leipzig  university,  82 
Leitomysl,  bishop  of,  140,  143,  148, 

174,  197,  236,312,314,317 


Lenz,  108 

Leo  IV,  132 

Lewis  the  Bavarian,  137,  194 

Lodi,  bishop  of,  249,  323 

Loesche,  262 

Lollards,  47,  95 

Loofs,  13 

Lord's  Supper  and  transubstantiation, 

50>  53)  156,  201,  212,  271.    5e^Rem- 

anence. 
Loserth,  19,  28,  47  sq.,  91,  93, 116, 121, 

146,  267,  272,  307,  309 
Louis  IX,  9 
Louvain,  159 
Ludmilla,  23,  35 
Lupac,  124 
Luther,  11,  15,  35,  44,  48,  no,  133, 

138,  141,  159,  177,  226,  252,  270, 

296,  301;  on  Huss,  85,  288,  292,304 
Liitzow,  2,  267,  304 
LjTa,  Nic.  of,  24s 

Mansi,  166,  195,  289,  322 

Map,  Walter,  265 

Marcus  of  Konigsgratz,  116 

Marsiglius  of  Padua,  11,  48,  50,  158 

Martin  V,  97,  162,  202,  213,  268,  328 

Martin  of  Prague,  Huss's  letters  to, 

168,  238  sq.,  284 
Matthew  Paris,  67 
Medicis,  14 
Melanchthon,  152 
Michael  de  Causis,  87,  123,  135,  139, 

171,  174,  175,  183,  188,  189,  224, 

233 
Michael  de  MoHnos,  199 
Middle  Ages,  i,  4 
Milicz  of  Kremsier,  28,  30  sq.,  40 
Mirbt,  137,  144,  213,  279,  289 
Mladenowicz,  165  sq,  168,  176  sq.,  181, 

194,   198,   204  sqq.,   208,   210,   218, 

222  sqq.,  22S  sq.,  240,  245,  248,  251 
Mohler,  236 
Moldau,  24,  25 
Moravians,  334 
Mortal  sin  destroys  kingly  and  priestly 

power,  54,  55,  216,  218 
Miihlheim,  John  of,  26,  90 
Miiller,  Karl,  291 
Mystics,  German,  12  sq. 


INDEX 


347 


Neander,  131 

Nicholas,  bishop  of  Nazareth,  166,  197 

Nieheim,  162,  163,  193,  312 

Nominalism,  206  sq. 

Nurnberg,  169 

Obeying  God,  57,  90 
Ockam,  11,  14 
Ostia,  cardinal  of,  248,  265 
Oxford,  45,  46,  68 

Palacky,  19,  20,  28,  30  sqq.,  42,  46; 
on  Huss  as  a  preacher,  48,  54,  62, 
68,  78,  86,  89,  93,  104,  124,  125,  164, 
167,  177,  186,  196,  225;  on  Sigis- 
mund,  229,  231;  on  Huss's  confes- 
sion, 246;  his  history  censored,  261; 
on  the  safe-conduct,  291,  304 

Palecz,  Huss's  friend,  54,  56,  60,  64, 
69;  goes  to  the  cardinals,  75,  89, 
100,  102;  opposes  Huss,  116,  122, 
125;  attacks  Huss,  139,  140; 
church's  declarations  final,  143,  145, 
i$2  sq.;  banished,  154;  charges  at 
Constance,  174  sq.,  176,  178,  183; 
hostility  to  Huss,  188,  213,  217  sq., 
220;  explains  his  activity  against 
Huss,  224  sq.,  230;  last  visit  to 
Huss,  233,  273,  275 

Papal  schism,  16,  50,  73  sqq. 

Paris,  university  of,  80,  156,  159,  163, 
209 

Pascal  H,  104 

Pastor,  II,  17,  74,  237 

Paulus,  302 

Peklo,  Peter,  91 

Penance,  114.    See  Absolution 

Per  Venerabilem,  5,  144 

Peter  Chelcicky,  332 

Peter  de  Luna.    See  Benedict  XIII 

Peter  of  Cachy,  64 

Peter,  the  Apostle,  118,  131,  278 

Peter  the  Lombard,  118,  131,  232 

Peter  Znaim,  54,  154 

Petrarch,  14,  25,  76,  79 

Philip  IV,  10  sq.,  16 

Pisa  council,  18,  74,  77,  85,  163 

Pius  II,  21,  25,  83.    See  ^Eneas 

Platina,  246 

Poggio,  325  sq. 


Pope,  claims  of,  7,  11;  heretic,  39,  55, 
117  5g.,  147,  219;  VVyclif  on,  52; 
Huss  on,  235,  278-281;  and  indul- 
gences, 119;  fallibility,  119,  128, 
278;  mandates  not  to  be  obeyed, 
127,  143  sq.,  147,  158,  280;  deposed, 
162 

Prachaticz,  58,  loi,  140,  151,  153,  159, 
189,  228,  275 

Prague,  city  of,  i,  22,  2?,  sq.,  58, 
78  sqq.,  12^  sq.;  university  of,  17, 
20,  44  sq.,  54,  55  sq.,  102,  140,  145, 
209,  239,  329 

Preaching,  27  sq.,  34  sqq.,  41,  51,  55, 
57,  61,  90,  g4sq.,  127,  146,  149,  217 

Predestination,  36,  184,  273 

Prierias,  284 

Priesthood,  54,  61,  72,  129-134,  158, 
281  sq. 

Procopius  of  Pilsen,  93 

Procopius  the  Great,  331 

Protiva,  J.,  26,  167 

Psalms,  182 

Purgatory,  120 

Rashdall,  45  sq.,  78 

Realism,  206  sq. 

Reason,  298 

Reformatory  councils,  14 

Reinstein,  John,  100, 102,  168,  174  sq., 

178 
Remanence  of  bread,  22,  53,  71,  103, 

250 
Renaissance,  13 
Retractations,  36 
Richental,  172,  176,  sq.,  192,  248,  254- 

258,  324 
Robert  of  Geneva,  17 
Robert  the  gaoler,  181 
Robertson,  J.  H.,  25 
Rock,  the,  278 
Rokyzan,  19,  33, 331 
Rome,  112,  128,  132 
Ruprecht,  75,  76,  85,  104 

Sacramentalism,  7 

Saints,  241 

Salmts  condudiis,  166,  170,  176,  181, 

186,  194,  196,  199,  211,  225,  251, 

285-290 


348 


INDEX 


Saracens,  130,  132 

Savonarola,  15,  22,  263,  304 

Schaching,  303 

Schaff,  Ch.  Hist.,  6  sq.,  11,  48,  57,  137, 
192 

Schmude,  262 

Schoolmen,  8,  5855.,  131,  226,  243 

Schwab,  201,  206,  243,  270,  297,  325, 
330 

Schwane,  277,  307 

Sentences  oj  the  Lombard,  115,  123, 180, 
261,  271,  279,  297,  30455.,  309 

Serm.  de  Sanctis,  27  sq.,  34,  37 

Shepherd,  325 

Sigismund,  24, 47,  76,  IC4  sq.,  108, 141; 
and  Huss,  155,  211,  218,  223,  252, 
255;  and  the  salmis  conductus,  166, 
234,  2$o  sq.,  285-291;  and  John 
XXIII,  164,  ig2  sq.,  194;  and  the 
Bohemian  nobles,  314-316,  320. 
Also  163  sq.,  175,  185,  203,  211,  223, 
225,  229,  234,  248,  25059. 

Simon  of  Tissnow,  93,  102,  153 

Simony,  16,  63,  71,  11855.,  i47>  ^S^ 

Six  Errors,  156 

Smith,  Preserved,  303 

Sophia,  Queen,  58,  73,  76, 96, 140,  238, 

319 
Stafcon,  124,  224 
Stanislaus  of  Znaim,  54,  56,  64,  69,  etc. 

See  Palecz 
Stefaneschi,  Cardinal,  135 
Stiekna,  John  of,  27,  34 
Stitny,  Thomas  of,  47 
Stokes,  46,  50,  52,  56,  108  sq.,  207, 

220 
Storch,  183 
Stupna,  Peter  of,  34 
Sutri,  162,  192 
Sylvester,  10 

Tabor,  320 
Tauler,  13 

Tevn  church,  25,  2855.,  113 
Thes.  meritorum,  122 
Thirty  articles,  250  sqq. 
Thirty  Years'  War,  333 
Thomas  a  Becket,  5,  104 
Thomas  Aquinas,  7  sqq.,  114,  131,  200, 
24s,  305  •y?- 


Thomas  of  Udine,  99 
Three  martyrs,  125 
Tithes,  pure  alms,  55 
Transubstantiation,    53.    See  Rema- 

nence 
Trialogiis,  47,  69,  88  55.,  97 
Truth,  58 

Tschackert,  206,  225  sq.,  266,  270 
Tyndale,  180,  284 

Unam  sanctam,  4,  6,  7,  274,  307 
Urban  V,  31 
Urban  VI,  17,  51,  iii 
Utraquists,  293,  328 sq. 

VanderHardt,  171, 173, 186, 191, 195, 

243,  247,  248,  253,  289 
Vite's,  St.,  30,  32,  263 
Volker,  301 

Walden,  50 

Waldenses,  56,  57,  69,  158,  265, 
299 

Waldhauser,  28  sq.,  42 

Waldo,  Peter,  57 

Walsingham,  51 

Wars,  religious,  117,  130,  132 

Welemowicz,  69 

Wenceslaus,  St.,  23,  26,  35 

Wenzel,  king,  58;  recognizes  the  Pisan 
popes,  73  sqq.,  96;  intercedes  for 
Huss,  99,  loi;  his  opportunity,  106, 
141,  164,  211,  262;  death,  330 

Wenzel  of  Duba,  165,  167,  170,  181, 
228,  238,  247 

Wenzel  of  Tiem,  114 

Whitcomb,  325 

White  Mountain,  ^33 

Wittenberg  university,  45 

Wok  of  Waldstein,  123 

Workman  and  Pope,  149,  181,  231, 
246 

Worms,  monument  of,  15 

Wratislaw,  23,  262,  277,  304 

Wyche,  95 

Wyclif,  8, 15;  on  preaching,  27;  Huss's 
debt  to,  43  sqq.,  308;  on  Lord's  Sup- 
per, 47,  207;  characterized,  48  sq.;  19 
articles  condemned,  51;  defines  the 
church,  52,  275;  Huss  on,  209,  210, 


INDEX 


349 


309;  condemned  by  council  of  Con- 
stance, 252;   son  of  Belial,  319 

Wyclif,  XLV  Articles  of,  69,  125,  126, 
135,  144  sq.,  147,  184,  209,  220 

Wyclif's  writings,  46,  47,  55  sq.; 
burned,  85  sq.,  88,  91,  108,  153,  195, 

307,  323 
Wyclifites,  48,  69,  72,  107,  152,  196, 

272 
Wylie,  108,  164,  216,  285 
Wylsnack,  64 
Wyssehrad,  20,  25,  loi,  143 


Zabarella,  164,  173,  177,  2oy  sq.,  217, 
222,  225,  230,  247,  250,  265,322 

Zbynek,  Archbishop,  59;  takes  up 
Huss's  case,  68,  72,  75  sqq.;  and  the 
university,  81,  85;  puts  Prague 
under  interdict,  86;  bull  against 
Wyclif,  88,  92,  99;  death,  105,  146, 
209 

Zdislav,  93 

Zebrak,  124,  127 

Ziska,  John  of,  328,  330 

Zul,  Nicholas,  59 


I 


Date  Due 


♦  <.*>. 


